PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E529-530)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 27, 2002
Paul Revere Freedom to Warn Act - Allows any Federal employee aggrieved by a violation of the right to petition Congress or a Member of Congress, or to furnish information to either House of Congress, or to a congressional committee or committee Member, or by a violation of specified criminal law provisions relating to witness tampering, to bring a civil action (entitled to a jury trial) in the appropriate U.S. District Court, within three years from the date of such violation, against any person, organization, or employer responsible for the violation, for lost wages and benefits, reinstatement, costs and attorney fees, compensatory or punitive damages, and equitable, injunctive, or any other relief that the court considers appropriate.States that a District Court shall retain jurisdiction over any claim filed unless all parties voluntarily elect, after the complaint is filed, that the proceeding be resolved through mediation and, if necessary, that a decision by an arbitrator selected by mutual consent, with approval by the Court, be binding.
People & committees
Rep. Israel, Steve [D-NY-2] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E529-530)
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E213-214)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3806 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3806 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3806 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3806 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.