Calling on Brazil in accordance with its obligations under the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction to obtain, as a matter of extreme urgency, the return of Sean Goldman to his father David Goldman in the United States; urging the governments of all countries that are partners with the United States to the Hague Convention to fulfill their obligations to return abducted children to the United States; and recommending that all other nations, including Japan, that have unresolved international child abduction cases join the Hague Convention and establish procedures to promptly and equitably address the tragedy of international child abductions.

The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.

Congressional Research Service

Official summary

Version 36 · Passed House amended · Mar 11, 2009

Calls on Brazil to discharge its duties under the Hague Convention to bring about Sean Goldman's return to his father David Goldman in the United States.

Urges countries determined by the Department of State to have issues of non-compliance with the Convention to fulfill their obligations.

Calls on all other nations to join the Convention and to establish procedures to address the tragedy of child abductions.

Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States should: (1) review its diplomatic procedures and the operations available under the Convention to ensure that effective assistance is provided to Mr. Goldman and other U.S. citizens in obtaining the return of their children from Brazil and other countries; (2) take other appropriate measures to ensure that Convention partners return abducted children to the United States; (3) urge other nations to become parties to the Convention; and (4) continue to work for the return of children abducted from the United States and for parental visitation rights when return is not yet achieved.

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.

People & committees

Who introduced it

Rep. Smith, Christopher H. [R-NJ-4] · R–NJ

Committees

Foreign Affairs Committee

57 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Legislative record

Actions

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

Mar 11, 2009
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Mar 11, 2009
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Mar 11, 2009
On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 418 - 0 (Roll no. 120). (text: CR H3300-3301)
House roll call 120 · Individual votes
Mar 11, 2009
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): 418 - 0 (Roll no. 120).(text: CR H3300-3301)
House roll call 120 · Individual votes
Mar 11, 2009
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3316-3317)
Mar 11, 2009
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
Mar 11, 2009
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 125.
Mar 11, 2009
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3300-3305)
Mar 11, 2009
Mr. Berman moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Feb 4, 2009
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Feb 4, 2009
Introduced in House
Feb 4, 2009
Introduced in House

Primary sources

Bill text & related measures

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

Engrossed in House · Mar 11, 2009 Formatted Text PDF Formatted XML
Introduced in House · Feb 4, 2009 Formatted Text PDF Formatted XML

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: Apr 7, 2025. 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.125 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

Discuss H.Res.125, 111th Congress: Calling on Brazil in accordance with its obligations under the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction to obtain, as a matter of extreme urgency, the return of Sean Goldman to his father David Goldman in the United States; urging the governments of all countries that are partners with the United States to the Hague Convention to fulfill their obligations to return abducted children to the United States; and recommending that all other nations, including Japan, that have unresolved international child abduction cases join the Hague Convention and establish procedures to promptly and equitably address the tragedy of international child abductions.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-resolution/125

Text version to examine: Engrossed in House · 2009-03-11.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/111/bills/hres125/BILLS-111hres125eh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T15:18:48Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Analyze H.Res.125 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.

Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.Res.125 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

Discuss H.Res.125, 111th Congress: Calling on Brazil in accordance with its obligations under the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction to obtain, as a matter of extreme urgency, the return of Sean Goldman to his father David Goldman in the United States; urging the governments of all countries that are partners with the United States to the Hague Convention to fulfill their obligations to return abducted children to the United States; and recommending that all other nations, including Japan, that have unresolved international child abduction cases join the Hague Convention and establish procedures to promptly and equitably address the tragedy of international child abductions.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-resolution/125

Text version to examine: Engrossed in House · 2009-03-11.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/111/bills/hres125/BILLS-111hres125eh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T15:18:48Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.Res.125 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.

Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.Res.125 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

Discuss H.Res.125, 111th Congress: Calling on Brazil in accordance with its obligations under the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction to obtain, as a matter of extreme urgency, the return of Sean Goldman to his father David Goldman in the United States; urging the governments of all countries that are partners with the United States to the Hague Convention to fulfill their obligations to return abducted children to the United States; and recommending that all other nations, including Japan, that have unresolved international child abduction cases join the Hague Convention and establish procedures to promptly and equitably address the tragedy of international child abductions.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-resolution/125

Text version to examine: Engrossed in House · 2009-03-11.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/111/bills/hres125/BILLS-111hres125eh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T15:18:48Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.Res.125 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.

Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.Res.125 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

Discuss H.Res.125, 111th Congress: Calling on Brazil in accordance with its obligations under the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction to obtain, as a matter of extreme urgency, the return of Sean Goldman to his father David Goldman in the United States; urging the governments of all countries that are partners with the United States to the Hague Convention to fulfill their obligations to return abducted children to the United States; and recommending that all other nations, including Japan, that have unresolved international child abduction cases join the Hague Convention and establish procedures to promptly and equitably address the tragedy of international child abductions.

Official record: https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-resolution/125

Text version to examine: Engrossed in House · 2009-03-11.

Official full text: https://www.congress.gov/111/bills/hres125/BILLS-111hres125eh.htm

Imported record last updated by the source: 2025-04-07T15:18:48Z. Verify current status and distinguish any later version from the version above.

Read the official text before answering. If you cannot access it, say so and ask me to provide it; do not assume a link means you have read the document. Distinguish proposals from enacted law, cite sources, and separate facts, interpretation, and uncertain predictions. Include counterarguments even when using a particular perspective.

Examine H.Res.125 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.