PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 109-379.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Dec 1, 2006
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Pueblo of Isleta Settlement and Natural Resources Restoration Act of 2006 - Establishes in the Treasury the Pueblo of Isleta Natural Resources Restoration Fund for: (1) settlement of the claims of the Pueblo of Isleta; and (2) the acquisition, restoration, improvement, development, and protection of land, natural resources, and cultural resources within the exterior boundaries of the Pueblo. Provides for the maintenance and investment of the restoration fund.
Ratifies the Agreement of Compromise and Settlement entered into between the United States and the Pueblo dated 12, 2005, as modified by the Extension and Modification Agreement executed by the United States and the Pueblo on June 22, 2006, to settle the claims in the case of Pueblo of Isleta v. United States, Docket No. 98-166L, pending in the United States Court of Federal Claims.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Pueblo and the United States to execute and file a joint stipulation for entry of final judgment in dismissal of such case.
Provides for the payment of compensation to the Pueblo from the permanent judgment appropriation for all monetary damages and attorney fees, interest, and other fees and costs of any kind that were or could have been presented in connection with Docket No. 98-166L.
People & committees
Rep. Pearce, Stevan [R-NM-2] · R–NM
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 109-379.
Became Public Law No: 109-379.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S10884)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S10884)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H7651-7652)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7651-7652)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5842.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7651-7653)
Mr. Pearce moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.5842 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.5842 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.5842 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.5842 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.