PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.6069 / 114th Congress

Pakistan State Sponsor of Terrorism Designation Act

Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 20, 2016

Pakistan State Sponsor of Terrorism Designation Act

This bill directs the Department of State to submit a determination regarding whether the government of Pakistan, including any of its agents or instrumentalities, committed, conspired to commit, attempted, aided, or abetted: (1) any of specified acts constituting an act of or support for international terrorism, or (2) any other act that constitutes an act of international terrorism.

Within 30 days of such submission, the State Department shall: (1) determine if any such act constitutes support for international terrorism, and (2) issue a follow-up report containing either a determination that Pakistan is a state sponsor of terrorism or a detailed justification as to why Pakistan's conduct does not meet the legal criteria for such designation.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Poe, Ted [R-TX-2] · R–TX

Committees

  • Foreign Affairs Committee
1 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

  2. Introduced in House

  3. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.6069 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.6069 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.6069 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.6069 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.

View full prompt & sources