Condemning in the strongest terms the terrorist attacks in Brussels on March 22, 2016, which murdered more than 30 innocent people, and severely wounded many more.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Mar 23, 2016
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Condemns the terrorist attacks in Brussels on March 22, 2016, which murdered more than 30 innocent people and severely wounded many more.
Expresses sympathy and condolences for those killed and injured in the attacks and for their families and friends.
Pledges support for the government of Belgium in its efforts to bring to justice those involved with the planning and execution of the attacks.
Declares that the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) poses a fundamental threat to the universal value of freedom in all countries.
States the concern of the House of Representatives about the flow of foreign fighters to and from the Middle East and West and North Africa and the threat they pose.
Expresses readiness to assist the government and people of Belgium to respond to the threat posed by ISIS and its terrorist affiliates.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 409 - 0 (Roll no. 138).(text: CR H1557)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1569-1570)
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. 658.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1557-1560)
Mr. Poe (TX) moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
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
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.658 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.658 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.658 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.658 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.