PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 551.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Aug 1, 2014
Prohibits a federal agency or instrumentality from using federal funding or resources after July 30, 2014, to:
consider or adjudicate any new or previously denied application of any alien requesting consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals, as authorized by Executive memorandum dated June 15, 2012, or by any other succeeding Executive memorandum or policy authorizing a similar program;
newly authorize deferred action for any class of aliens not lawfully present in the United States; or
authorize any alien to work in the United States who was not lawfully admitted into the United States and who is not in lawful U.S. status on the date of enactment of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN-7] · R–TN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 551.
Received in the Senate. Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 216 - 192, 1 Present (Roll no. 479). (text: CR H7228-7229)
House roll call 479 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 216 - 192, 1 Present (Roll no. 479).(text: CR H7228-7229)
House roll call 479 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H7235)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 5272.
Provides for further consideration of H.R. 5230 and for consideration of H.R. 5272. Both bills are debatable for 1 hour. The amendments to H.R. 5230printed in part A of the report shall be considered as adopted. The amendment to H.R. 5272 printed in Part B of the report shall be considered as adopted. The rule provides for one motion to recommit with or without instructions for each measure. The rule amends section 2 of H.Res. 700 to allow for motions to suspend the rules with respect to a measure addressing missile defense of Israel.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 710. (consideration: CR H7228-7236)
Rule H. Res. 710 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 710 Reported to House. Provides for further consideration of H.R. 5230 and for consideration of H.R. 5272. Both bills are debatable for 1 hour. The amendments to H.R. 5230printed in part A of the report shall be considered as adopted. The amendment to H.R. 5272 printed in Part B of the report shall be considered as adopted. The rule provides for one motion to recommit with or without instructions for each measure. The rule amends section 2 of H.Res. 700 to allow for motions to suspend the rules with respect to a measure addressing missile defense of Israel.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 696 Reported to House. The rule makes in order one hour of debate each for H.R. 5230 and H.R. 5272. The rule also makes in order for one hour debate on a motion that the House disagree to the Senate amendment to H.R. 5021. Any motion pursuant to clause 4 of rule XXII relating to H.R. 5021 may be offered only by the Majority Leader or his designee. It shall be in order at any time on the legislative day of July 31, 2014 for the Speaker to entertain motions to suspend the rules.
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.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.5272 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.5272 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.5272 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.5272 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.