Referred to the House Committee on Ethics.
This resolution changes the House's internal rules to ban a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner from engaging in a sexual relationship with any House employee, including those supervised by the Member or employed by a committee the Member serves on. It updates a specific clause of the House Rules and applies only within the House of Representatives. It does not create federal criminal law, affect Senate rules, or require the President's signature. Enforcement and discipline would be handled through the House's internal processes such as the Committee on Ethics.
This is a House simple resolution considered and voted on only in the House; it does not go to the Senate or the President. It is used to set the House's internal rules and would be enforced internally by House authorities.
This House resolution would amend Clause 18(a) of House Rule XXIII to remove the existing exception and prohibit any Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner from engaging in a sexual relationship with any employee of the House.
The change expands the current prohibition by covering all House employees rather than only those supervised by the Member or serving on the Member’s committee.
Text is a narrow House rule change likely achievable within the House but not a statute—cannot become law via typical congressional enactment without separate process.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly states a narrow internal rule change but provides limited operational detail. It identifies the target provision to be amended and the general aim (prohibiting sexual relationships between Members and House employees), but it does not supply complete revised language, definitions, enforcement procedures, or accountability mechanisms in the text provided.
Progressives emphasize staff protection and power imbalance concerns
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize staff protection and power imbalance concerns
Likely supportive.
Seen as strengthening protections for staff and addressing power-impaired consensual relationships.
Would emphasize workplace safety and abuse-of-power prevention.
Generally supportive but cautious.
Values the intent to protect staff, while wanting precise language, fair enforcement, and limited unintended consequences.
Skeptical to mixed.
Some appreciate stronger ethics rules, but many worry about government intrusion into consensual adult relationships and overbroad enforcement.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Text is a narrow House rule change likely achievable within the House but not a statute—cannot become law via typical congressional enactment without separate process.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize staff protection and power imbalance concerns
Text is a narrow House rule change likely achievable within the House but not a statute—cannot become law via typical congressional enactme…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly states a narrow internal rule change but provides limited operational detail. It identifies the target provision to be amended and the general aim (prohibitin…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.