PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 109-133.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Dec 20, 2005
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed in the Senate on July 26, 2005. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Amends the Pueblo Lands Act of 1924 to allocate jurisdiction over offenses committed anywhere within the exterior boundaries of any grant from a prior sovereign to a Pueblo Indian tribe of New Mexico to: (1) the Pueblo for any offense committed by a member of the Pueblo or an Indian or by any other Indian-owned entity; (2) the United States for any specified federal offense that is committed by or against an Indian or any Indian-owned entity, or that involves any Indian property or interest; and (3) the state of New Mexico for any offense committed by a person who is not a member of a Pueblo or an Indian, which offense is not subject to U.S. jurisdiction.
People & committees
Sen. Domenici, Pete V. [R-NM] · R–NM
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 109-133.
Became Public Law No: 109-133.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Cleared for White House.
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 H11046-11047)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H11046-11047)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 279.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H11046-11047)
Mr. Radanovich moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S9055-9056)
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S983-984)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S983)
Introduced in Senate
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: Mar 9, 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.279 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.279 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.279 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.279 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.