H.Res. 779: To establish prospective standards effective January 20, 2017 defining impeachable "high crimes and misdemeanors" within the meaning of Article II, section 4 as applied to the President of the United States to provide fair warning and evenhandedness in the administration of the impeachment power of the House of Representatives.

H.Res. 779: To establish prospective standards effective January 20, 2017 defining impeachable "high crimes and misdemeanors" within the meaning of Article II, section 4 as applied to the President of the United States to provide fair warning and evenhandedness in the administration of the impeachment power of the House of Representatives.

113th Congress · introduced 2014-12-11 · Government Operations and Politics · Latest: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

federal

Follow this bill, step by step

Where it came from: introduced 2014-12-11 · official record
Who proposed it: Rep. Bentivolio, Kerry L. [R-MI-11] · what a sponsor is
What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
Where it stands now: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.

What does this mean?

Official title

To establish prospective standards effective January 20, 2017 defining impeachable "high crimes and misdemeanors" within the meaning of Article II, section 4 as applied to the President of the United States to provide fair warning and evenhandedness in the administration of the impeachment power of the House of Representatives.

Plain summary

Declares that the following presidential actions shall constitute impeachable "high crimes and misdemeanors," which will cause the House of Representatives to vote articles of impeachment to send to the Senate for trial: initiating war without express congressional authorization; killing American citizens in the United States or abroad who are not engaged in active hostilities against the United States without due process (unless the citizen was under indictment for a felony and the killing was necessary to prevent imminent serious physical danger to third parties); failing to superintend subordinates guilty of chronic constitutional abuses; expending money in violation of conditions imposed for the expenditure of appropriated funds; intentionally lying to Congress to obtain an authorization for war; failing to take care that the laws be faithfully executed through signing statements or systematic policies of non-enforcement; substituting executive agreements for treaties; intentionally lying under oath to a federal judge or grand jury; misusing federal agencies to advance a partisan political agenda; and refusing to comply with a congressional subpoena for documents or testimony issued for a legitimate legislative purpose. Makes this Act effective January 20, 2017.

Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.

What a vote does

A “Yea” vote

A Yea supports adopting this resolution.

A “Nay” vote

If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.

PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).

What does this mean? (plain words)

Official text

To establish prospective standards effective January 20, 2017 defining impeachable "high crimes and misdemeanors" within the meaning of Article II, section 4 as applied to the President of the United States to provide fair warning and evenhandedness in the administration of the impeachment power of the House of Representatives.

Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House)

AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text

No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.

Limited to a few requests an hour per person.

The strongest published arguments

Arguments for (supporters)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Arguments against (opponents)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Alternatives

Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes

Officials and money

Sponsor: Rep. Bentivolio, Kerry L. [R-MI-11] · 0 cosponsors

Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.

No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.

Words on this page, explained (4)

Appropriation: Money a legislature sets aside by law for a specific purpose. Government agencies may spend public money only as it has been appropriated.
Authorization: A law that creates or continues a government program and says what it may do, often with a suggested spending ceiling. An authorization alone does not provide money; a separate appropriation does.
Resolution: A formal statement or decision by a legislative body. Simple resolutions often only express an opinion or set rules for one chamber; they do not become law.
Roll-call vote: A vote where each member's position is recorded by name, so the public can see how every member voted. "Yea" means yes, "Nay" means no, "Present" means the member was there but did not take a side.

Plain meanings written from linked sources. All words.

Sources

Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House)
Congress.gov
Data: GovInfo BILLSTATUS bulk data (Library of Congress), BILLSTATUS-113hres779.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/113/hres>

Record fed-us-cong113-hres779 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong113 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong113