Recognizing November 14, 2009, as the 49th anniversary of the first day of integrated schools in New Orleans, Louisiana.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Feb 3, 2010
Recognizes the 49th anniversary of school integration in New Orleans, Louisiana.
Remembers Judge J. Skelly Wright for his lifelong commitment to promoting civil rights, fairness, and equality.
Commends Ruby Bridges for her courage in becoming the first African-American student to attend William Frantz Elementary School in New Orleans, and for her lifetime commitment to promoting diversity and improving educational opportunities for all children.
Supports policies and efforts to promote equal opportunities for all students.
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): 416 - 0 (Roll no. 32). (text: CR 2/2/2010 H435)
Passed/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): 416 - 0 (Roll no. 32).(text: CR 2/2/2010 H435)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H493-494)
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. 901.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H435-437)
Ms. Fudge moved to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, as amended.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education.
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.
Referred to House Judiciary
Referred to the Committee on Education and Labor, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to House Education and Labor
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.
Source last updated: Mar 23, 2026. 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.901 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.901 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.901 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.901 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.