PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Sep 30, 1999
District of Columbia Court Employees Act of 1999 - Treats nonjudicial employees of the District of Columbia court as Federal employees solely for purposes of Federal law (relating to employees' right to petition Congress).Allows such employees or former employees to file civil actions, constituting their exclusive remedies under Federal or District laws, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia for relief of violation of this Act (with regard to an adverse personnel action for communications with Congress) if: (1) they reasonably believe that such violation has occurred; (2) the individuals file a grievance relating to such violation with the Joint Committee on Judicial Administration of the District within 270 days after the violation occurred; (3) the Committee makes a final decision or makes no decision within 60 days after the filing; and (4) the individuals file the civil action within one year after the date of the violation. Specifies judicial relief for such individuals, including reinstatement to former position and reinstatement of full fringe benefits and seniority rights, as well as compensation for lost wages and benefits.
People & committees
Rep. Davis, Tom [R-VA-11] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment and an amendment to the Title by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment and an amendment to the Title by Unanimous Consent.
Amendment SP 2290 agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent.
Amendment SP 2290 proposed by Senator Warner for Senator Thompson.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S12324-12325)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 295.
Committee on Governmental Affairs. Reported to Senate by Senator Thompson with an amendment and an amendment to the title. With written report No. 106-167.
Committee on Governmental Affairs. Reported to Senate by Senator Thompson with an amendment and an amendment to the title. With written report No. 106-167.
Committee on Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment favorably.
Referred to Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 858.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1279-1281)
Mr. Davis (VA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on District of Columbia.
Referred to the House Committee on Government Reform.
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: Feb 10, 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.858 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.858 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.858 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.858 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.