PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.Res.118 / 103rd Congress

To condemn the release by the Government of Malta of convicted terrorist Mohammed Ali Rezaq.

Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 8, 1993

Condemns the release by the Government of Malta of convicted terrorist Mohammed Ali Rezaq. Urges all governments to: (1) cooperate in extraditing Rezaq to the United States or to another concerned country to face criminal charges for involvement in the Egypt Air hijacking of November 1985 and the murder of civilians; and (2) not provide safe haven to terrorists. Urges the President to review the U.S. relationship with Malta.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Lantos, Tom [D-CA-12] · D–CA

Committees

  • Foreign Affairs Committee
23 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

  2. On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 421 - 0 (Roll no. 119).

    House roll call 119 · Individual votes
  3. Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 421 - 0 (Roll no. 119).

    House roll call 119 · Individual votes
  4. Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1699)

  5. At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule I, the chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed until March 30.

  6. DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.

  7. Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1658-1660)

  8. Mr. Lantos moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.

  9. Subcommittee on Europe and the Middle East Discharged.

  10. Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.

  11. Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

  12. Ordered to be Reported (Amended) in the Nature of a Substitute.

  13. Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

  14. Executive Comment Received from State.

  15. Referred to the Subcommittee on Europe and the Middle East.

  16. Referred to the Subcommittee on International Security, International Organizations and Human Rights.

  17. Executive Comment Requested from State.

  18. Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

  19. Introduced in House

  20. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Jan 2, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.Res.118 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.Res.118 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.Res.118 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.Res.118 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.

View full prompt & sources