PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 27, 2012
Expresses the sense of Congress that the Secretary of Defense (DOD), and the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) with respect to the Coast Guard, should duly honor those members of the Armed Forces who are killed or wounded in the United States in terrorist attacks that are inspired by the ideology that gives rise to terrorism, as defined by the Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.
Provides that, for purposes of awarding the Purple Heart, the Secretary of the military department concerned shall treat a member of the Armed Forces who is killed or wounded in a terrorist attack within the United States in the same manner as a member killed or wounded in action due to an act of an enemy of the United States.
Makes this Act effective as of January 1, 2009.
Directs the Secretaries concerned to: (1) review each death or wounding of a member within the United States between January 1, 2009, and the date of enactment of this Act to determine whether such death or wounding qualifies as a death or wounding resulting from a terrorist attack for purposes of this Act; and (2) upon a positive determination, take appropriate action.
People & committees
Rep. King, Peter T. [R-NY-3] · R–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 Military Personnel.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 15, 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.5144 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.5144 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.5144 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.5144 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.