Rep. Mike Kelly

Maddy summaryThis bill blocks federal funding for colleges that operate or partner with campus health clinics providing abortion drugs or abortions to students or staff. It requires institutions receiving federal funds to annually certify that no such services are offered at their on-campus clinics. The law specifically excludes hospital-based clinics from coverage and defines "abortion drugs" as medications intended to terminate pregnancy (excluding specific medical exceptions). It directly affects public and private colleges receiving federal aid, as most institutions of higher education qualify for such funding.

This resolution urges all participants in the Good Friday agreement and subsequent agreements to honor their obligations. The resolution also supports efforts to (1) prevent a hard border within the island of Ireland and (2) promote peace and prosperity for all communities. (The island of Ireland is divided between Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom, and the Republic of Ireland, a European Union member state.)

Maddy summaryHR 361, the "Stop Inflationary Spending Act," requires the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to analyze how major budget bills (reconciliation legislation) impact inflation. Specifically, the CBO must provide an inflation analysis for such bills covering the fiscal year they take effect and the next four years, including the basis for each estimate. This applies to bills reported by a House committee, submitted to the Budget Committee, or directly to the Rules Committee. The bill affects Congress and the CBO by adding a new procedural requirement for budget-related legislation. It does not change spending levels but mandates a specific analysis before such bills are considered.

This resolution reaffirms support for the Belfast/Good Friday agreement on the 25th anniversary of its signing. The resolution also calls for full implementation of the agreement and commends those who have worked to further peace and reconciliation in Northern Ireland in accordance with the principles of the agreement.

Protect Our Military Families' 2nd Amendment Rights Act This bill broadens the scope of allowable firearms transactions involving active duty service members and their spouses. Specifically, the bill allows a licensed gun dealer, importer, or manufacturer to sell or ship a firearm or ammunition to the spouse of a member of the Armed Forces on active duty outside the United States. Current law already allows a licensed dealer, importer, or manufacturer to sell or ship a firearm or ammunition to a member of the Armed Forces on active duty outside the United States. The bill also specifies that, for purposes of federal firearms laws, a member of the Armed Forces on active duty, or his or her spouse, is a resident of the state in which (1) the member or spouse maintains legal residence, (2) the permanent duty station of the member is located, and (3) the member maintains a home from which he or she commutes to the permanent duty station.

Maddy summaryThe GAS Act (HR 337) prohibits any federal agency from banning the sale or use of gas-burning stoves in the United States. This applies to all agencies defined under federal law, including the Environmental Protection Agency and Consumer Product Safety Commission. The bill directly blocks agencies from enacting new regulations that would restrict gas stoves, preventing future regulatory actions. It does not affect existing stove sales or current agency authority but sets a clear restriction on future rulemaking.

Maddy summaryHR 297 requires the military Secretary to reinstate service members who were involuntarily separated solely for refusing a COVID-19 vaccine. It applies specifically to those separated only due to vaccine refusal, not other reasons. If a covered member chooses reinstatement, they must be returned to their previous rank and branch of service. The bill mandates this action without requiring the member to receive the vaccine.

Qualified Immunity Act of 2023 This bill provides statutory authority for qualified immunity for law enforcement officers in civil cases involving constitutional violations. Current law provides a statutory civil cause of action against state and local government actors (e.g., law enforcement officers) for violations of constitutional rights, also known as Section 1983 lawsuits. The Supreme Court has also found an implied cause of action against federal law enforcement officers in certain situations (e.g., Fourth Amendment violations), also known as Bivens lawsuits. However, under the judicial doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials performing discretionary duties are generally shielded from civil liability, unless their actions violate clearly established rights of which a reasonable person would have known. The bill provides statutory authority for these principles with respect to law enforcement officers. Specifically, under the bill, law enforcement officers are entitled to qualified immunity if (1) at the time of the alleged violation, the constitutional right at issue was not clearly established or the state of the law was not sufficiently clear for every reasonable officer to know that the conduct was unconstitutional; or (2) a court has held that the specific conduct at issue is constitutional. The bill applies to federal, state, and local law enforcement officers. It also specifies that law enforcement agencies and local governments may not be held liable if their officers are entitled to qualified immunity.

Maddy summaryHJRES 8 proposes a constitutional amendment to permanently set the Supreme Court's size at nine justices. The bill would require any future changes to the Court's composition to follow this specific number, locking in the current structure. It does not alter the existing Court size (which has been nine since 1869) but aims to prevent future adjustments through legislative action. The amendment must be ratified by three-fourths of state legislatures within seven years to take effect. This is a procedural proposal focused on constitutional structure, not a direct policy affecting citizens or programs.

Maddy summaryThis bill amends the tax code to prevent abortion expenses from being counted as deductible medical costs. It directly affects taxpayers who pay for abortions, as they can no longer include these expenses when calculating their medical deduction on federal tax returns. The key provision adds a new rule to the Internal Revenue Code stating that "amounts paid for abortion shall not be taken into account" under medical expense deductions. This change applies to tax years beginning after the bill's enactment date.