PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 9, 2019
This bill confers exclusive jurisdiction to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims for the Miami Tribe of Oklahoma's land claim arising under the Treaty of Grouseland. The court must render judgement without regard to defenses based on the passage of time, including the statute of limitations. The United States is the only entity liable for such a claim, and monetary damages are the only available remedy. This jurisdiction expires unless such a claim is filed within one year.
All other claims of the tribe, including claims to title arising under the Treaty of Grouseland and the Northwest Ordinance, are extinguished.
People & committees
Rep. Mullin, Markwayne [R-OK-2] · R–OK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee for Indigenous Peoples of the United States.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.396 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.396 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.396 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.396 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.