PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, 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.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 1, 2023
Justice for All Act of 2023
This bill prohibits discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or race-related characteristics in schools, businesses, federally funded programs, and other settings. It also provides statutory authority for and expands the types of civil actions that may be brought for violations.
For example, the bill expands provisions under the Civil Rights Act of 1964 so as to (1) prohibit federally funded programs from discriminating based on sex or religion; and (2) prohibit public accommodations, including stores and transit services, from discriminating based on sex.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill defines sex to include sex stereotypes, pregnancy, childbirth, sexual orientation, gender identity, and sex characteristics. It also expands the definition of race to include traits that have been historically associated with race (e.g., natural hair textures). The expanded definitions apply to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Housing Act (discrimination in public and private housing), and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (discrimination based on sex in federally funded educational programs).
Further, the bill provides statutory authority for disparate impact or intentional discrimination claims under the aforementioned acts, as well as the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (discrimination based on age by federally funded programs) and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (discrimination based on disability by federally funded programs).
The bill also includes other provisions that address (1) profiling by law enforcement officers, (2) employer liability with respect to civil rights violations, (3) predispute arbitration agreements in civil rights cases, and (4) governmental immunity in suits involving constitutional violations.
People & committees
Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-12] · D–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, 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 the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, 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.
Source last updated: Jul 21, 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.697 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.697 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.697 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.697 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.