PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Select Committee on Intelligence. (text of measure as introduced: CR S3976-3977)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 21, 2011
Recognizes that continued investigation of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employees for involvement in a detention and interrogation program to avert terrorist attacks on the United States is unwarranted and will likely have a chilling effect on the work of CIA and other U.S. national security professionals.
Urges: (1) the President and the Attorney General to immediately close the Department of Justice's (DOJ) ongoing investigation and decline future prosecution of CIA employees for actions related to the interrogation of detainees at overseas locations, including the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on detained terrorists; and (2) the President to develop and implement policies allowing for the long-term detention and interrogation of high-value detainees, including detainees captured overseas or in the custody of foreign countries.
People & committees
Sen. DeMint, Jim [R-SC] · R–SC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Select Committee on Intelligence. (text of measure as introduced: CR S3976-3977)
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: Jan 14, 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.Res.213 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.Res.213 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.Res.213 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.Res.213 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.