Condemning and disapproving of the failure of the Obama administration to comply with the lawful statutory requirement to notify Congress before transferring individuals detained at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and expressing concern about the national security risks over the transfer of five Taliban leaders and the repercussions of negotiating with terrorists.
Latest action. The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on July 31, 2014. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Condemns and disapproves of the Obama administration's failure to comply with the lawful 30-day statutory reporting requirement in executing the transfer of five senior Taliban members from detention at U.S. Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Expresses concern over: (1) national security implications that may arise from the Taliban members' release, including the national security threat to the American people and the U.S. Armed Forces; and (2) the repercussions of negotiating with terrorists, and the risk that such negotiations may further encourage hostilities and the abduction of Americans.
Stipulates that further violations of appropriate law are unacceptable.
States that these actions have burdened the trust in the commitment and ability of the Obama administration to work with Congress.
Expresses relief that Sergeant Bergdahl has returned safely to the United States.
Written by analysts at the Congressional Research Service and published on Congress.gov, not by Civibrief. Summarized at the "Passed House amended" stage on September 9, 2014. It describes the bill, it is not the legal text.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Civibrief does not map this action to a stage in the process. See the official record.
Where is it in the process, and what happens next?
The latest action on file does not map to a stage Civibrief recognizes, so the page will not name one. The record's own words are the reliable fact here.
The record's latest action, on September 9, 2014: The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
What is a simple resolution, exactly?
A simple resolution concerns one chamber only, such as its own rules or an expression of its opinion. The other chamber and the President play no part, and it does not carry the force of law.
Has anyone actually voted on it?
No. No roll call in this Congress cites this measure. That is the ordinary outcome: most measures never reach a recorded floor vote, and a committee ends most of them simply by not acting.
A vote is not the only thing that happens to a measure. Hearings, markups, and referrals are all recorded actions, and none of them is a vote of the full chamber.
Who is behind it?
E. Rigell (R-VA) introduced it on June 25, 2014, and 94 members have since signed on as cosponsors.
They come from both major parties: 2 Democrats, 92 Republicans.
Cosponsoring is a formal signature on the text. It is not a commitment to vote for the measure, it does not bind anyone's party, and a long list of cosponsors is a measure of attention rather than of prospects.
How long has it been in play?
It was introduced on June 25, 2014, 4460 days ago. The most recent recorded action was 4384 days ago, on September 9, 2014.
Measures do not carry over. Anything the 113th Congress has not finished by January 3, 2015 dies when the term ends, and has to be introduced again from the start in the next Congress.
That deadline applies to this measure too, even though it was never headed for the President's desk.
Every answer above is assembled from this measure's own record on Congress.gov and from published counts of what Congress has passed before. Civibrief does not predict outcomes and takes no position on any measure.
Vote history
- HouseThe title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
- SenateNot stated in the latest action
- PresidentNot stated in the latest action