PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jul 15, 2004
States that the House of Representatives reaffirms its commitment to Israel's security and its support of Israel's right to self-defense.
Condemns the Palestinian leadership for failing to: (1) carry out its responsibilities under the Roadmap and under other obligations it has assumed; and (2) fight terrorism, including by bringing an end to terrorist attacks directed at Israel.
Calls on Palestinians and all states to fight terrorism so that progress can be made toward resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Deplores the July 8, 2004, advisory judgment of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the misuse of the ICJ for the political purpose of advancing the Palestinian position on matters Palestinian authorities have said should be the subject of negotiations.
Regrets the ICJ's advisory judgment which is likely to undermine its reputation and interfere with a resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
Commends the President and the Secretary of State for their leadership in marshaling opposition to such misuse of the ICJ.
Calls on members of the international community to reflect on: (1) the steps taken by the Government of Israel to mitigate the impact of the security barrier on Palestinians, including steps it has taken by order of its High Court of Justice; and (2) the damage that will be done to the ICJ, the United Nations, and to individual Israelis and Palestinians under color of the ICJ advisory judgment that interfere in the Roadmap process and impede efforts toward an Israeli-Palestinian negotiated settlement.
Urges all nations to join the United States in international fora to prevent political exploitation of the ICJ's advisory judgment.
People & committees
Rep. Pence, Mike [R-IN-6] · R–IN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 361 - 45, 13 Present (Roll no. 378). (text: CR 7/14/2004 H5767-5768)
House roll call 378 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 361 - 45, 13 Present (Roll no. 378).(text: CR 7/14/2004 H5767-5768)
House roll call 378 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5802-5803)
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 until July 15.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H. Res. 713.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5767-5775)
Mr. Pence moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Referred to the House Committee on International Relations.
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.713 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.713 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.713 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.713 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.