PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Oct 16, 2015
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The expanded summary of the Senate reported version is repeated here.)
Adoptive Family Relief Act
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to declare that if an immigrant visa was issued on or after March 27, 2013, for a child who has been lawfully adopted, or who is coming to the United States to be adopted, by a U.S. citizen, any statutory immigrant visa fees relating to a renewal or replacement of such visa may be waived or refunded if:
the child was unable to use the original immigrant visa during the period of its validity as a direct result of extraordinary circumstances, including the denial of an exit permit; and
such inability was attributable to factors beyond the control of the adopting parent or parents.
People & committees
Sen. Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 114-70.
Became Public Law No: 114-70.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H6815-6816)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H6815-6816)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 1300.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6815-6817)
Mr. Franks (AZ) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S5057; text as passed Senate: CR S5057)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S5057; text as passed Senate: CR S5057)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 145.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Grassley without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Grassley without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S2798)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 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.1300 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.1300 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.1300 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.1300 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.