PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 81 · Passed House without amendment · Jun 28, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Finds Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, to be in contempt of Congress for failure to comply with a congressional subpoena.
Directs the Speaker of the House of Representatives to certify the report of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, detailing the refusal of Mr. Holder to produce documents to the Committee as directed by subpoena, to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, to the end that Mr. Holder be proceeded against in the manner and form provided by law.
Directs the Speaker to otherwise take all appropriate action to enforce the subpoena.
People & committees
Rep. Issa, Darrell E. [R-CA-49] · R–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 recorded vote: 255 - 67, 1 Present (Roll no. 441). (text: CR H4402)
House roll call 441 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by recorded vote: 255 - 67, 1 Present (Roll no. 441).(text: CR H4402)
House roll call 441 · Individual votesOn motion to refer to Oversight and Government and Reform Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 172 - 251 (Roll no. 440). (consideration: CR H4416-4417)
House roll call 440 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to refer was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H4416)
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 708, the House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Dingell motion to refer.
Mr. Dingell moved to refer to Oversight and Government Reform. (consideration: CR H4412)
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 708, the House proceeded with fifty minutes of debate on H. Res. 711.
Considered as privileged matter. (consideration: CR H4402-4417)
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.711 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.711 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.711 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.711 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.