H.R.3089 — NDO Fairness Act
House Roll Call
H.R.3089
| Bill | H.R.3089 — NDO Fairness Act |
|---|---|
| Vote question | On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass |
| Vote type | 2/3 Yea-And-Nay |
| Result | Passed |
| Totals | Yea 412 / Nay 0 / Present 0 / Not Voting 23 |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| R | 212 | 0 | 0 | 10 |
| D | 200 | 0 | 0 | 13 |
| I | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Research Brief
On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass
Bill Analysis
The NDO Fairness Act (HR 3089) aims to amend the existing framework governing the issuance of non-discrimination orders (NDOs) in the context of federal civil rights protections. This legislation seeks to enhance fairness and transparency in the process by which NDOs are issued, particularly in cases involving allegations of discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
Key provisions of the bill include establishing clearer criteria for the issuance of NDOs, ensuring that individuals and entities subject to such orders are afforded due process. The bill mandates that NDOs must be based on credible evidence and requires that the affected parties receive timely notification of any orders issued against them. Additionally, it stipulates that individuals have the right to contest NDOs in a judicial forum, thereby reinforcing the principles of accountability and fairness in civil rights enforcement.
The NDO Fairness Act is expected to impact various federal agencies involved in civil rights enforcement, including the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). By enhancing procedural safeguards, the bill aims to benefit individuals who may be unjustly subjected to NDOs, thereby promoting equitable treatment under the law.
Funding for the implementation of the provisions outlined in the bill is not explicitly detailed; however, it is anticipated that existing appropriations for civil rights enforcement agencies will be utilized to support the necessary administrative changes.
The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives and has progressed to the Senate, where it has been read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary for further consideration. The timeline for further action remains uncertain, pending deliberations within the committee and potential amendments before a Senate vote.
Yea (412)
C
Colin Allred
K
Kelly Armstrong
D
Dan Bishop
E
Earl Blumenauer
J
Jamaal Bowman
K
Ken Buck
M
Michael Burgess
C
Cori Bush
K
Ken Calvert
Y
Yadira Caraveo
T
Tony Cárdenas
J
Jerry Carl
M
Matt Cartwright
L
Lori Chavez-DeRemer
D
David Cicilline
G
Gerald Connolly
J
Jason Crow
A
Anthony D'Esposito
L
Lloyd Doggett
J
John Duarte
J
Jeff Duncan
A
Anna Eshoo
A
A. Ferguson
S
Scott Franklin
M
Matt Gaetz
M
Mike Gallagher
R
Ruben Gallego
J
John Garamendi
M
Mike Garcia
B
Bob Good
K
Kay Granger
G
Garret Graves
M
Mark Green
R
Raúl Grijalva
B
Brian Higgins
J
Jeff Jackson
S
Sheila Jackson Lee
B
Bill Johnson
D
Daniel Kildee
D
Derek Kilmer
A
Ann Kuster
D
Doug Lamborn
J
Jake LaTurner
B
Barbara Lee
D
Debbie Lesko
B
Blaine Luetkemeyer
K
Kathy Manning
L
Lucy McBath
K
Kevin McCarthy
L
Lisa McClain
P
Patrick McHenry
M
Marcus Molinaro
G
Grace Napolitano
W
Wiley Nickel
B
Bill Pascrell
D
Donald Payne
G
Greg Pence
D
Dean Phillips
K
Katie Porter
B
Bill Posey
C
Cathy Rodgers
M
Matthew Rosendale
C
C. Ruppersberger
J
John Rutherford
G
George Santos
J
John Sarbanes
D
David Schweikert
P
Pete Sessions
A
Abigail Spanberger
M
Michelle Steel
C
Chris Stewart
E
Eric Swalwell
R
Rashida Tlaib
D
David Trone
N
Nydia Velázquez
M
Michael Waltz
D
Debbie Wasserman Schultz
B
Brad Wenstrup
J
Jennifer Wexton
S
Susan Wild
B
Brandon Williams
Not Voting (23)
L
Larry Bucshon
A
Alexander Mooney
M
Mary Peltola
