PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 15, 2014
West Hunter Street Baptist Church Study Act - Directs the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study of the historic West Hunter Street Baptist Church located at 775 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive, S.W., Atlanta, Georgia, and the block on which the Church is located.
Requires the Secretary to
evaluate the national significance of the site;
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
determine the suitability and feasibility of designating such area as a unit of the National Park System;
consider alternatives for the preservation, protection, and interpretation of the site;
consider the effect of the designation of the study area as a unit of the National Park System on existing commercial and recreational activities, including but not limited to hunting, fishing, and recreational shooting, and on the authorization, construction, operation, maintenance, or improvement of energy production and transmission infrastructure, and the authority of state and local governments to manage those activities;
identify any authorities, including condemnation, that will compel or permit the Secretary to influence or participate in local land use decisions (such as zoning) or place restrictions on non-federal lands if the study area is designated as a unit of the National Park System.
Requires owners of private property adjacent to the study area to be notified of the study's commencement and scope.
Requires the Secretary to submit to Congress a report containing the results of the study and any conclusions and recommendations.
People & committees
Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank," Jr. [D-GA-4] · D–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H7495-7496)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7495-7496)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4119.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7495-7497)
Mr. Hastings (WA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 439.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 113-592.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 113-592.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Public Lands and Environmental Regulation Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Public Lands and Environmental Regulation.
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: Sep 8, 2026. 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.4119 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.4119 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.4119 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.4119 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.