PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Feb 17, 2005
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the Senate on February 16, 2005. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Designates the U.S. courthouse at 501 I Street in Sacramento, California, as the Robert T. Matsui United States Courthouse.
People & committees
Sen. Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
For Further Action See H.R.787.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S1693; text as passed Senate: CR S1693)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S1693; text as passed Senate: CR S1693)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 7.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Inhofe without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Inhofe without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S316)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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 S.125 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 S.125 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 S.125 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 S.125 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.