PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Oct 9, 2007
Denounces and demands the cessation of the practices of female genital mutilation, domestic violence, honor killings, acid burning, dowry deaths, and other gender-based persecutions and crimes.
Asserts that women are not chattel, should not be trafficked, exploited, or sold for services, and should not be denied the right to education, to ownership of property, or to participate in full, economic, social and political life.
Demands the cessation of these barbaric practices and the dismantling of social and institutional mechanisms which perpetuate systematic discrimination against women and girls.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Calls on all governments to pass enforceable laws banning these practices, prosecute any individuals who persecute or violate women and girls with these acts, and pass measures to empower women and girls and afford them equal access to educational, social, and economic opportunities.
Calls on the President and fellow donor countries to promote the rights, health, empowerment of women in every aspect of their foreign assistance to developing countries, and discourage continued acts of violence against women and the impunity that often accompanies these acts.
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that: (1) participation, protection, recognition, health, and equality of women and girls are crucial to achieving a just, moral, and peaceful society; and (2) regardless of religion, geography, or form of government, women should not be denied equal rights, which should be defended and enforced when they are abridged, challenged, or violated.
People & committees
Rep. Jackson-Lee, Sheila [D-TX-18] · D–TX
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): 378 - 0 (Roll no. 949). (text: CR H11353-11354)
House roll call 949 · 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): 378 - 0 (Roll no. 949).(text: CR H11353-11354)
House roll call 949 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H11353-11356, H11368)
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. 32.
Considered under suspension of the rules.
Ms. Jackson-Lee moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Committee Agreed to Seek Consideration Under Suspension of the Rules, (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights, and Oversight.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
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.32 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.32 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.32 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.32 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.