PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S3577; text: 6/24/2025 CR S3519)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 24, 2025
This resolution condemns the June 14, 2025, attacks on Minnesota state legislators and calls on the people of the United States to reaffirm our commitment to a safe, civil, and peaceful democracy.
The resolution also honors (1) the lives of Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark Hortman who were killed, (2) Senator John Hoffman and his wife Yvette Hoffman who were critically injured, and (3) the law enforcement officers who rapidly responded to the attacks and apprehended the suspected perpetrator.
People & committees
Sen. Klobuchar, Amy [D-MN] · D–MN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S3577; text: 6/24/2025 CR S3519)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on the Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on the Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. 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.301 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.301 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.301 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.301 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.