PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 22, 2024
This resolution establishes in the House of Representatives the Task Force on the Attempted Assassination of Donald J. Trump.
With regards to the attempted assassination on July 13, 2024, in Butler, Pennsylvania, the task force shall investigate and fully examine all actions by any (1) federal agency, department, officer, or employee; (2) state or local government, including state and local law enforcement; and (3) private entities or individuals.
The task force shall consist of not more than 11 Members of the House appointed by the Speaker, not more than 5 of whom shall be appointed after consultation with the minority leader.
The resolution gives the task force specified powers, including the authority to take depositions and issue subpoenas. It also requires House committees to transfer relevant records to the task force within seven days of the resolution's adoption.
The task force must issue a final report on its findings no later than December 13, 2024, including any recommendations for legislative changes needed to prevent future security lapses.
People & committees
Rep. Kelly, Mike [R-PA-16] · R–PA
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 motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 416 - 0 (Roll no. 393). (text: CR H4891-4892)
House roll call 393 · 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 - 0 (Roll no. 393). (text: CR H4891-4892)
House roll call 393 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H4904)
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. 1367.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4891-4894)
Mr. Burgess moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Referred to the House Committee on Rules.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 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.1367 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.1367 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.1367 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.1367 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.