PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Private Law No: 108-4.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 13, 2003
Makes Durreshahwar Durreshahwar, Nida Hasan, Asna Hasan, Anum Hasan, and Iqra Hasan each eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for adjustment of status to that of a lawful permanent resident of the United States under the Immigration and Nationality Act, upon payment of the required visa fees.
People & committees
Rep. Holt, Rush [D-NJ-12] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Private Law No: 108-4.
Became Private Law No: 108-4.
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 S11328-11329; text as passed Senate: CR S11329)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S11328-11329; text as passed Senate: CR S11329)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 769.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Hatch without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Hatch without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed without objection. (text as passed House: CR H5154)
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.(text as passed House: CR H5154)
Considered from the Private Calendar. (consideration: CR H5154)
Called up from the Private Calendar for consideration.
Placed on the Private Calendar, Calendar No. 4.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 108-531.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 108-531.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
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 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.867 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.867 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.867 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.867 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.