PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6323-6324)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 15, 1998
Condemns and calls for the rejection of the brutal murder of James Byrd, Jr., of Jasper, Texas, as horrific and intolerable. Expresses the condolences of the Senate to the Byrd family and notes the family's religious faith, under the leadership of James Sr., and Stella Byrd, and the Reverend Kenneth Lyons, Pastor of the Greater New Bethel Baptist Church, that has helped the family through this most trying time. Commends the leadership shown by Jasper County Sheriff Billy Rowles, city of Jasper Mayor R.C. Horn, and other community leaders in responding to this tragedy. Urges: (1) that law enforcement officials at all appropriate levels continue with the full and fair investigation into all the facts of the case; and (2) prosecutors to proceed with a fair and speedy trial to bring the perpetrators of this outrageous crime to justice.
People & committees
Sen. Hutchison, Kay Bailey [R-TX] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6323-6324)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S6323-6324)
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: Apr 7, 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.248 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.248 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.248 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.248 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.