PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S2794)
Congressional Research Service
Version 80 · Reported to Senate without amendment · Apr 28, 2016
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Condemns the terrorist attacks on March 22, 2016, in Brussels, Belgium.
Honors the memories of Justin and Stephanie Shults, Alexander and Sascha Pinczowski, and Gail Martinez, who were murdered by the Islamic State in these attacks.
Expresses deepest sympathies for the victims and their families.
Renews the solidarity of the government and people of the United States with the people and the leadership of Belgium, as well as with those throughout the world who work to eliminate terrorism.
Pledges U.S. support to Belgium, Europe, and all U.S. allies in the effort to defeat the Islamic State and associated groups.
Reaffirms the Senate's commitment to the transatlantic relationship and the shared values of freedom, democracy, and human rights.
People & committees
Sen. Corker, Bob [R-TN] · R–TN
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 S2794)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S2794)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 452.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported by Senator Corker without amendment and with a preamble. Without written report.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported by Senator Corker without amendment and with a preamble. Without written report.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (text of measure as introduced: CR S2495-2496)
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.442 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.442 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.442 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.442 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.