PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 16, 1997
Sexual Harassment Accountability Act of 1997 - Amends the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) to direct the commanding officer of a unit, vessel, facility, or area who receives a complaint alleging sexual harassment by a person subject to the UCMJ to: (1) forward the complaint within 24 hours to his or her superior officer having authority to convene a general court martial; and (2) complete and report to such superior officer on an investigation within ten days after receipt of the complaint. Requires the superior officer to submit to the Secretary of the military department concerned a report on any such complaint and investigation. Requires each such Secretary to transmit to the Secretary of Defense, who shall then transmit to the Congress, all such reports received for the previous year. Requires the officer exercising general court martial jurisdiction over the accused to provide a thorough and impartial investigation of any complaint involving rape, forcible sodomy, or assault with intent to commit rape or sodomy upon a person subject to the UCMJ. Requires the accused to be advised of such allegations, to be represented by appropriate counsel, and to have full opportunity to cross-examine witnesses.
People & committees
Sen. Snowe, Olympia J. [R-ME] · R–ME
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services.
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: Aug 21, 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 S.762 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.762 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.762 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.762 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.