PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 3, 2025
Chiricahua National Park Act
This bill redesignates the Chiricahua National Monument in Arizona as the Chiricahua National Park.
The bill directs the National Park Service (NPS) to (1) ensure the protection of traditional cultural and religious sites in the park, and (2) provide access to those sites by members of Indian tribes for traditional cultural and customary uses.
Upon the request of an Indian tribe, the NPS may temporarily close to general public use one or more specific areas of the park to protect traditional cultural and customary uses in the area by members of the tribe. The closure must be limited to the smallest practicable area for the minimum period necessary for the traditional cultural and religious activities.
People & committees
Rep. Ciscomani, Juan [R-AZ-6] · R–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 119-133.
Became Public Law No: 119-133.
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 S5226)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2525)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2525)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6380.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2525-2527)
Mr. Wittman moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 467.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-543.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-543.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Subcommittee on Federal Lands Discharged
Subcommittee Hearings Held
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural 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: Oct 28, 2026. 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.6380 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.6380 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.6380 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.6380 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.