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 28, 2019
This resolution (1) strongly opposes President Trump's ban on transgender members of the Armed Forces, (2) rejects the scientific and medical claims upon which it is based, and (3) strongly urges the Department of Defense to not reinstate the ban and to maintain an inclusive policy allowing qualified transgender Americans to enlist and serve in the Armed Forces.
People & committees
Rep. Kennedy, Joseph P., III [D-MA-4] · D–MA
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: 238 - 185, 1 Present (Roll no. 135). (text: CR H2891)
House roll call 135 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 238 - 185, 1 Present (Roll no. 135).(text: CR H2891)
House roll call 135 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 124.
The resolution provides for one hour debate on H.R. 7 and H.Res. 124.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 252. (consideration: CR H2891-2899)
Rule H. Res. 252 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 252 Reported to House. The resolution provides for one hour debate on H.R. 7 and H.Res. 124.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jun 6, 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.124 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.124 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.124 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.124 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.