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 · Jun 11, 1998
Condemns and calls for the condemnation of the brutal killing of James Byrd, Jr., which occurred in Jasper, Texas, as unacceptable and outrageous. Declares that the House of Representatives pledges to: (1) do everything in its power to probe the underlying causes of this brutal killing; and (2) join in efforts to bring an end to racism and the underlying fear and hatred and to encourage all Americans to dedicate themselves to ending racism and violence in the United States. Calls on the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Justice, the White House, and all other Federal law enforcement agencies to conduct an immediate, full, and fair investigation into all of the facts of the case to aggressively respond to this tragedy with indictments. Urges the prosecution to proceed aggressively with a fair but speedy trial.
People & committees
Rep. Waters, Maxine [D-CA-35] · D–CA
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: 397 - 0 (Roll No. 231).
House roll call 231 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 397 - 0 (Roll No. 231).
House roll call 231 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered pursuant to a previous order of the House.
EXTENSION OF DEBATE - By unanimous consent, debate was extended by 10 minutes, equally divided and controlled.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the unanimous consent agreement just made, the House proceeded with 20 minutes of debate on the resolution.
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H4531-4538)
Committee on Judiciary discharged.
Committee on Judiciary discharged.
Ms. Waters asked unanimous consent to discharge from committee and consider.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
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.466 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.466 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.466 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.466 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.