PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 13, 2013
North Korea Sanctions and Diplomatic Nonrecognition Act of 2013 - Continues diplomatic, economic, and military sanctions against the government of North Korea as a supporter of international terrorism until the President certifies to Congress that North Korea: (1) is no longer engaged in the illegal transfer of missile or nuclear technology, particularly to Iran, Syria, or Burma; (2) is not assisting foreign terrorist organizations, engaged in counterfeiting U.S. currency, or engaged in illicit narcotics traffic; (3) has returned the last remains of Reverend Kim Dong-shik to the United States; (4) has released abducted Japanese nationals and surviving Korean War prisoners of war; and (5) has undertaken specified actions regarding family reunification, penal reforms, refugee access, and religious organization communications.
Expresses the sense of Congress that the Secretary of State should redesignate North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism.
Finds that the United States did not grant diplomatic recognition to North Korea upon its establishment as a client regime of the former Soviet Union in 1948.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Continues diplomatic nonrecognition of North Korea until such benchmarks have been met.
Directs the President, in the case of a North Korean missile, rocket, or other airborne launch or the conducting of a nuclear test in violation of U.N. Security Council Resolutions 1695, 1718, and 1874, to instruct the U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations to use U.S. influence to secure adoption of a Security Council resolution condemning North Korea's action and requiring implementation of comprehensive sanctions and an inspection regime against North Korea.
People & committees
Rep. Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana [R-FL-27] · R–FL
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 Trade.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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 12, 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.673 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.673 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.673 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.673 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.