PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 20, 1995
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that: (1) the perpetrators of crimes against humanity in the conflict among republics of the former Yugoslavia (the republics) and persons in positions of authority in the republics who are responsible for crimes against humanity should be condemned; (2) persons who are indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICT) should not occupy positions of authority in any government or entity in the republics; (3) the United States should insist upon the full cooperation of the republics in bringing indicted individuals to justice and should oppose amnesty for any indicted war criminals from the conflict; (4) future support for the reintegration of the republics into the international community should be dependent on their full cooperation and support of the ICT; and (5) ICT investigators should be given full access to all sites, witnesses, and evidence of alleged and suspected war crimes.
People & committees
Rep. Kennedy, Patrick J. [D-RI-1] · D–RI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.
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: Jan 2, 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.282 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.282 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.282 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.282 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.