PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 29, 2010
Condemns the abduction and wrongful retention of all minor children being held in Japan away from their U.S. parents.
Calls on the government of Japan to: (1) facilitate the resolution of all abduction cases and to recognize related U.S. court orders; (2) include Japan's Ministry of Justice in work with the U.S. government to identify and locate U.S. citizen children alleged to have been wrongfully removed to or retained in Japan; and (3) review and amend its consular procedures to ensure that travel documents for children are issued with due consideration to any court orders.
Calls on Japan to accede to the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Calls on the President of the United States and the Secretary of State to continue raising the issue of abduction and wrongful retention of U.S. citizen children in Japan.
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States should: (1) recognize the issue of child abduction to and retention of U.S. citizen children in Japan as an issue of paramount importance to the United States within the context of its bilateral relationship with Japan; (2) work with the government of Japan to enact consular and passport procedures and legal agreements to prevent parental abduction to and retention of children in Japan; (3) review the advisory services available to U.S. citizens from government agencies to ensure that assistance is given to U.S. citizens in preventing the wrongful retention or removal of children and in obtaining the expeditious return of their children from Japan; (4) review its advisory services for members of the U.S. Armed Forces, particularly those stationed in Japan, to ensure that preventive education and legal assistance are made available; and (5) call upon the Secretary to establish procedures with the government of Japan to resolve parental child abduction or access issues.
People & committees
Rep. Moran, James P. [D-VA-8] · D–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 416 - 1 (Roll no. 553). (text: CR 9/28/2010 H7043-7044)
House roll call 553 · Individual votesPassed/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): 416 - 1 (Roll no. 553).(text: CR 9/28/2010 H7043-7044)
House roll call 553 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H7258-7259)
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.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 1326.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7043-7048)
Mr. Berman moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E751)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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
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.1326 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.1326 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.1326 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.1326 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.