PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.4240 / 114th Congress

No Fly for Foreign Fighters Act

Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Official summary

Version 36 · Passed House amended · Apr 27, 2016

(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on April 15, 2016. The summary of that version is repeated here.)

No Fly for Foreign Fighters Act

(Sec. 2) This bill directs the Government Accountability Office to study and report to Congress within one year on: (1) whether past weaknesses in the operation and administration of the Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB) and its subsets (e.g., the No Fly list) have been addressed, and (2) the extent to which additional changes may address or mitigate existing vulnerabilities.

The study and report must include, with respect to the TSDB, information on: (1) timely integration of information, (2) increased demands for information, (3) accessibility to relevant agencies, and (4) identification of known or suspected terrorists by users.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Jackson Lee, Sheila [D-TX-18] · D–TX

Committees

  • Judiciary Committee
  • Judiciary Committee
23 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

  2. Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

  3. On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2020)

  4. Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H2020)

  5. DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4240.

  6. Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2019-2022)

  7. Mr. Goodlatte moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.

  8. Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 377.

  9. Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 114-495.

  10. Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 114-495.

  11. Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.

  12. Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

  13. Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations Discharged.

  14. Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.

  15. Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

  16. Introduced in House

  17. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.4240 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.4240 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.4240 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.4240 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.

View full prompt & sources