PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.On motion to table the measure Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 225 - 196, 7 Present (Roll no. 269).
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 9, 2023
This resolution condemns and censures Representative Adam Schiff for conduct that misleads the American people and directs the Committee on Ethics to investigate that conduct.
People & committees
Rep. Luna, Anna Paulina [R-FL-13] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
On motion to table the measure Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 225 - 196, 7 Present (Roll no. 269).
House roll call 269 · Individual votesMs. Clark (MA) moved to table the measure.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H2924-2925; text: CR H2924-2925)
QUESTION OF THE PRIVILEGES OF THE HOUSE - Mrs. Luna rose to a question of the privileges of the House and offered the resolution. The Chair directed the Clerk to report the resolution. Upon examination of the resolution, the Chair determined that the resolution did constitute a question of the privileges of the House.
NOTIFICATION OF INTENT TO OFFER RESOLUTION - Mrs. Luna notified the House of her intent to offer a privileged resolution pursuant to clause 2(a)(1) of rule IX. The Chair announced that a determination will be made at the time designated for consideration of the resolution.
Referred to the House Committee on Ethics.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.489 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.489 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.489 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.489 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.