PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 20, 2010
Force Protection and Readiness Act of 2010 - Grants, in cases arising under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for communications made between an alleged victim of sexual assault and a Sexual Assault Victim Advocate of the Department of Defense (DOD), to an individual who consulted with such an Advocate, a victim service organization, or a health care professional the privilege of refusing to disclose a confidential communication made by the individual if such communication was made for the purpose of securing advice, counseling, treatment, or assistance in connection with a sexual assault or other sexual misconduct. Allows the privilege to be claimed by the individual's guardian or conservator. Provides exceptions.
Requires the Secretary of the military department concerned to provide for the expedited consideration of a request for a permanent change of military station or unit transfer submitted by a member of the Armed Forces serving on active duty who was a victim of sexual assault or other sexual offense.
Codifies under federal law a required information database on sexual assault incidents involving members of the Armed Forces. Repeals a superseded requirement under the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary of Defense to establish a universal hotline to facilitate the reporting of sexual assault involving members of the Armed Forces.
Requires: (1) at least one full-time Sexual Assault Victim Advocate to be assigned to each battalion or equivalent military unit; and (2) appropriate training and certification of such advocates.
Requires a copy of the record of proceedings of a court-martial involving a sexual assault or other sexual offense to be given to the victim if the victim testified during the proceedings.
Directs the Secretary to provide a training module for judge advocates who serve as trial counsel to improve their ability to investigate and prosecute cases involving a sexual assault or other sexual offense.
People & committees
Rep. Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [D-NY-28] · D–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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 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.5347 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.5347 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.5347 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.5347 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.