PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 26, 2012
Intercountry Adoption Universal Accreditation Act of 2012 - Applies universal intercountry adoption accreditation standards under the Intercountry Adoption Act of 2000, and related regulations, to the same extent as they apply to the offering or provision of adoption services in connection with an adoption under the Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption, to any person offering or providing adoption services in connection with a foreign orphan under age 16 adopted or to be adopted by a U.S. citizen.
Gives the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS), the Attorney General, and the accrediting entities the duties, responsibilities, and authorities under the Intercountry Adoption Act of 2000 and related regulations with respect to a person offering or providing such adoption services, regardless of whether such services are offered or provided in connection with a Convention adoption.
Amends the Intercountry Adoption Act of 2000 to repeal the prohibition against, and so make available, collected fees to accrediting entities.
People & committees
Rep. Sires, Albio [D-NJ-13] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
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.6027 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.6027 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.6027 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.6027 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.