PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Jun 12, 2024
This resolution finds Attorney General Merrick Brian Garland in contempt of Congress for failing to comply with a congressional subpoena. It also directs the Speaker of the House to (1) certify the related report from the House Judiciary Committee to the United States Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia for criminal proceedings, and (2) take all other appropriate action to enforce the subpoena.
People & committees
Rep. Jordan, Jim [R-OH-4] · R–OH
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: 216 - 207 (Roll no. 260). (text: CR H3759)
House roll call 260 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 216 - 207 (Roll no. 260). (text: CR H3759)
House roll call 260 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3970-3971)
Pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule XIX, further proceedings resumed on H.Res. 1292.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - Pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule XIX, the Chair announced further proceedings on H. Res. 1292 would be postponed.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H. Res. 1292.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 8070. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 8070 under a structured rule and the resolution accompanying House Report 118-527 under a closed rule. The resolution provides for one hour of general debate on each measure and one motion to recommit on H.R. 8070.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 1287. (consideration: CR H3759-3767)
By direction of the Committee on the Judiciary, Mr. Jordan called up H. Res. 1292 and asked for its immediate consideration.
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.1292 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.1292 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.1292 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.1292 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.