PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration And Border Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 23, 2013
Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to permit each applicant for naturalization to choose to have the oath of allegiance for naturalization administered by a Member of Congress, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner (Member).
Limits the administration of the oath: (1) by a Senator to individuals who reside in the Senator's state; and (2) by a Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner to individuals who reside in the respective congressional district.
Limits the Member's authority solely to the administration of such oath.
Prohibits a Member from administering the oath during the 90-day period before any election for federal, state, or local office in which the Member is a candidate.
Requires a Member to administer the oath only at times and places designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS).
Prohibits a Member from administering the oath during any period in which exclusive authority to administer it may be exercised by an eligible court for the person concerned, unless the court has waived such exclusive authority.
People & committees
Rep. Serrano, Jose E. [D-NY-15] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration And Border Security.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
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: Jan 3, 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.405 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.405 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.405 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.405 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.