Bill · H.Res. 494· House(119-HRES-494)
Condemning the Violent Attacks on Law Enforcement Officers and Military Servicemembers, and the Destruction of Personal Property in Los Angeles, California.
- Introduced
- 6/10/2025
- Last activity
- 6/10/2025 — Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Sponsored by
- Earl Carter
- Cosponsors
- - 4 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
A House resolution is the House speaking for itself: stating a position, honouring someone, or setting its own rules. Adopting it is the whole process. Once the House agrees to it, it is officially the House's word; it is not a law, so the Senate and the President have no part in it.
What this bill would do
This resolution condemns the violent attacks on law enforcement and military members during riots in Los Angeles on June 6, 2025. It addresses the destruction of federal buildings, small businesses, and public property that occurred during protests against immigration enforcement. The text criticizes local and state officials for supporting sanctuary city policies and opposing the deployment of the National Guard. It further denounces the actions of Governor Gavin Newsom and Mayor Karen Bass for obstructing federal operations. Finally, the resolution affirms the duty of federal agencies to enforce immigration laws and supports the prosecution of those who commit violence against law enforcement.
Yes· 3 of 4
Does this give the federal government more power?+7
The resolution emphasizes federal mandates over state and local policies regarding immigration and public order.
Would business owners be better off under this?+5
The resolution denounces the looting and destruction of small businesses during the riots.
Does this make it easier to run a small business?+5
The resolution denounces the looting and destruction of small businesses that occurred during the riots.
The opposite· 3 of 4
Does this leave more decisions to the states?-7
The resolution criticizes state and local officials for their policies and actions against federal authority.
Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this?-5
The resolution criticizes sanctuary city policies that protect individuals regardless of immigration status.
Would immigrants be better off under this?-5
The resolution targets sanctuary policies and emphasizes strict immigration law enforcement.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Support for Lawful Prosecution: The resolution supports the prosecution of individuals who engage in violence against federal agents or law enforcement, regardless of their immigration status (Resolution Section 4). This could lead to accountability for those committing violent acts.
-
Restoration of Order: The text notes that the President authorized 2,000 National Guard troops to assist in restoring order and protecting public safety (Whereas Clause) (Resolution Section 2). This deployment aims to address the chaos and threats to public safety caused by the riots.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Erosion of Public Order through Local Policies: The resolution states that sanctuary city policies adopted by municipalities like Los Angeles have shielded individuals with criminal backgrounds from deportation, which the text claims has contributed to the erosion of public order and safety (Whereas Clause).
-
Obstruction of Federal Duties: The resolution asserts that the actions of certain state and local officials to interfere with or undermine the duties of federal agencies, such as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, undermine the rule of law (Resolution Section 1 and 3).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Business Owners+5Good For Hispanic Americans-5Good For Immigrants-5Good For Urban Residents-3
- Economy And Finance
- Improves Small Business Support+5
- Social Issues And Justice
- Improves Border Security+5
- Governance And Ideology
- Increases Federal Power+7Increase States Rights-7
- 6/17/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/12/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/11/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/10/2025
- Submitted in House
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
Mary MillerRepublican · Illinois
Harold RogersRepublican · Kentucky
Keith SelfRepublican · Texas
Claudia TenneyRepublican · New York