PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 3.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Jan 12, 2017
Objects to U.N. Security Council Resolution 2334. Such resolution characterizes Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem as illegal and demands cessation of settlement activities.
Calls for such resolution to be repealed or fundamentally altered and allows all final status issues toward a two-state solution to be resolved through direct bilateral negotiations between the parties. Rejects efforts by outside bodies to impose solutions that set back the cause of peace.
Demands that the United States ensure that no action is taken at the Paris Conference on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict scheduled for January 15, 2017, that imposes an agreement or parameters on the parties.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Notes that granting membership and statehood standing to the Palestinians at the UN, its specialized agencies, and other international institutions outside of the context of a bilateral peace agreement with Israel would cause severe harm to the peace process, and would likely trigger penalties under the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2016 regarding limitations on assistance to the Palestinians.
Rejects any efforts by international organizations to use such resolution to further isolate Israel and urges the U.S. government to act where needed to counter any such efforts.
Urges: (1) the U.S. presidential Administrations to uphold the practice of vetoing all Security Council resolutions that recognize unilateral Palestinian actions or dictate terms and a time line for a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; and (2) the incoming presidential Administration to work with Congress to create conditions that facilitate the resumption of negotiations without preconditions between Israelis and Palestinians to achieve a sustainable agreement acceptable to both sides.
Reaffirms that it is U.S. policy to seek a sustainable, just, and secure two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
People & committees
Sen. Rubio, Marco [R-FL] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 3.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported by Senator Corker with amendments and with a preamble. Without written report.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported by Senator Corker with amendments and with a preamble. Without written report.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Ordered to be reported with amendments favorably.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
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.6 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.6 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.6 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.6 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.