Condemning the recent increase in acts of anti-Semitism in members countries of the European Union, and for other purposes.
Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 30, 2004
Expresses the sense of the House of Representatives that: (1) all countries should recognize the seriousness of anti-Semitic acts and should take action against those individuals and entities that incite hatred and perpetrate criminal acts against Jewish populations; (2) member countries of the European Union (EU) should continue to officially and publicly repudiate those individuals and entities that carry out such acts and should undertake tougher and more unified measures to combat the growth of anti-Semitic violence and intimidation throughout the European continent; (3) the EU should protect the safety of their Jewish communities through the establishment of the position of a director to monitor and combat anti-Semitism within the EU through education, media analysis, and coordination with responsible partners in each EU member country; (4) the delegates from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Conference on Anti-Semitism should call on their governments to make anti-Semitism a criminal offense and should establish within the OSCE a framework to monitor anti-Semitic activities, to monitor legislation to combat anti-Semitism, to coordinate between law enforcement organizations in such countries, and to implement relevant educational programs for the next generation of Europeans; (5) the President should direct the United States Permanent Representative to the United Nations to work with EU member countries to secure passage of a resolution condemning anti-Semitism at the upcoming session of the United Nations General Assembly; and (6) combating acts of anti-Semitism worldwide through diplomatic efforts should be a U.S. foreign policy priority.
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
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.Res.616 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.Res.616 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.Res.616 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.Res.616 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.