PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Foreign Relations. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 21, 1996
Finds that the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia merits continued and increased U.S. support for its efforts to investigate and bring to justice the perpetrators of gross violations of international law in the former Yugoslavia. Declares that: (1) the President should support the request of the President of the Tribunal for the High Representative to reimpose full economic sanctions on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) and the so-called Republika Srpska until the Republic and Bosnian Serb authorities have complied with their obligations under the Peace Agreement and UN Security Council Resolutions to cooperate fully with the Tribunal; (2) the NATO-led Implementation Force (IFOR) should make it an urgent priority to detain and bring to justice persons indicted by the Tribunal; and (3) states in the former Yugoslavia should not be admitted to international organizations and fora until they have complied with their obligations under the Peace Agreement and UN Security Council Resolutions to cooperate fully with the Tribunal.
People & committees
Sen. Lieberman, Joseph I. [D-CT] · D–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 514.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported to Senate by Senator Helms without amendment and with a preamble. Without written report.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported to Senate by Senator Helms without amendment and with a preamble. Without written report.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6668-6669)
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.270 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.270 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.270 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.270 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.