PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property.
Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Jul 21, 2004
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Expresses the sense of Congress that the Supreme Court should act expeditiously to resolve the current confusion and inconsistency in the Federal criminal justice system by promptly considering and ruling on the constitutionality of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.
People & committees
Sen. Hatch, Orrin G. [R-UT] · R–UT
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 Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and passed without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S8572-8574; text as passed Senate: CR S8573-8574; text of measure as introduced: CR S8566)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Submitted in the Senate, considered, and passed without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S8572-8574; text as passed Senate: CR S8573-8574; text of measure as introduced: CR S8566)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 16, 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.Con.Res.130 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.Con.Res.130 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.Con.Res.130 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.Con.Res.130 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.