PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Mar 12, 2024
This resolution urges the Biden Administration to immediately use certain authorities related to immigration, such as the authority to reinstate the Migrant Protection Protocols, enter into asylum cooperative agreements, and detain inadmissible non-U.S. nationals (aliens under federal law). The resolution also states that the Biden Administration is refusing to use such authorities.
People & committees
Rep. De La Cruz, Monica [R-TX-15] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 226 - 193 (Roll no. 85). (text: CR H1127-1128)
House roll call 85 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 226 - 193 (Roll no. 85). (text: CR H1127-1128)
House roll call 85 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1133-1134)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H. Res. 1065, the Chair put the question on agreeing to the resolution and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Fry demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
The previous question was ordered on the resolution and the preamble pursuant to the rule.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 1065.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 6276 and H. Res. 1065. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 6276 under a structured rule with one hour of general debate and one motion to recommit. Resolution provides for consideration of H. Res. 1065 under a closed rule with one hour of general debate.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 1071. (consideration: CR H1127-1131)
Rule H. Res. 1071 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 1071 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 6276 and H. Res. 1065. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 6276 under a structured rule with one hour of general debate and one motion to recommit. Resolution provides for consideration of H. Res. 1065 under a closed rule with one hour of general debate.
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.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.Res.1065 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.Res.1065 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.Res.1065 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.Res.1065 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.