Expressing the sense of the House that the Guidelines on General Crimes, Racketeering Enterprise and Terrorism Enterprise Investigation as modified on May 30, 2002 ("Ashcroft Guidelines") should be rescinded and replaced by the former Guidelines ('Levi guidelines') to protect Americans from domestic Federal Bureau of Investigation spying in the absence of suspected criminal activity.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 20, 2008
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that: (1) the Attorney General should rescind the Guidelines on General Crimes, Racketeering Enterprise and Terrorism Enterprise Investigation as modified on May 30, 2002 (Ashcroft Guidelines), and reinstate the previous Guidelines adopted in 1976 (Levi Guidelines); and (2) the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) should require a reasonable indication that a federal crime has been, is being, or will be committed before it engages in domestic spying or other investigative activity.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Nov 15, 2019. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
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.1211 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.1211 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.1211 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.1211 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.