PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Resolution agreed to in Senate with an amendment and an amended preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S9111-9114; text of measure as reported in Senate: CR S9111-9113; text as passed Senate: CR S9113-9114)
Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Dec 20, 2013
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the Senate on December 18, 2013. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Condemns Iran for its state-sponsored persecution of its Baha'i minority and its continued violation of the International Covenants on Human Rights.
Calls on Iran to release the 7 imprisoned leaders, the 12 imprisoned educators, and all other prisoners held solely on account of their religion.
Calls on the President and Secretary of State, in cooperation with responsible nations, to condemn Iran's continued violation of human rights and demand the release of prisoners held solely on account of their religion.
Urges the President and Secretary to utilize all available authorities, including the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010, to impose sanctions on Iranian government officials and other individuals directly responsible for serious human rights abuses, including abuses against the Baha'i community of Iran.
People & committees
Sen. Kirk, Mark Steven [R-IL] · R–IL
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 with an amendment and an amended preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S9111-9114; text of measure as reported in Senate: CR S9111-9113; text as passed Senate: CR S9113-9114)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Resolution agreed to in Senate with an amendment and an amended preamble by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S9111-9114; text of measure as reported in Senate: CR S9111-9113; text as passed Senate: CR S9113-9114)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 269.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported by Senator Menendez with an amendment and with an amended preamble. Without written report.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Reported by Senator Menendez with an amendment and with an amended preamble. Without written report.
Committee on Foreign Relations. Ordered to be reported with amendments favorably.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1713-1714)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.75 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.75 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.75 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.75 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.