PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to Subcommittee on Courts and Administrative Practice.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 6, 1993
Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act - Amends the Federal judicial code to declare that State authorities shall enforce any child support order according to its terms and shall not modify it, except in certain circumstances, if such order is made consistent with this Act by another State court. Confers continuing, exclusive jurisdiction upon the court of a State which has made such child support order and which is either the child's State or the State of one of the contestants. Authorizes a State court to modify a child support order made by the court of another State if: (1) it has jurisdiction to make such an order; and (2) the court of the other State no longer has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction because it is no longer the child's State or the residence of any contestant or each contestant has filed written consent for the State to modify the order and assume continuing, exclusive jurisdiction of such order. Grants the court of a State which no longer has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction of a child support order authority to enforce it with respect to unsatisfied obligations which accrued before the date on which a modification was made by another State in accordance with this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Frank, Barney [D-MA-4] · D–MA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to Subcommittee on Courts and Administrative Practice.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
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.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5571-5572)
Mr. Brooks moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 117.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 103-206.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 103-206.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended).
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended).
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Administrative Law and Governmental Relations.
Referred to the House Committee on 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: Aug 10, 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.454 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.454 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.454 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.454 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.