Second Amendment Restoration Act of 2025

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/6035

Last Updated: November 18, 2025

Second Amendment Restoration Act of 2025

HR. 6035, 119th Congress — read as touching Firearms & Ammunition.

The sponsor

Rep. Hunt, Wesley [R-TX-38]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$84,535 raised

20 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

55% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Homeland Security" section, p. 201-204 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Invalid Date

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

✅

Passed Senate

🏛️

House Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Summary Style:

**HR 6035: A Lucrative Opportunity for Deregulation**

The Second Amendment Restoration Act of 2025, HR 6035, is a bill that seeks to repeal the firearm-related provisions of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I see this legislation as a prime example of how inefficient democratic processes can be leveraged to further my interests.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of HR 6035 is to restore constitutional protections for law-abiding citizens' right to bear arms, thereby refocusing federal efforts on addressing the root causes of violence. In reality, this bill aims to dismantle unnecessary regulations that stifle innovation and hinder the growth of the firearms industry.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill repeals Title II of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which imposed burdensome requirements on firearms manufacturers and dealers. It also restores prior law regarding firearms provisions in various statutes, including the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The primary beneficiaries of this legislation are firearms manufacturers, dealers, and enthusiasts. However, I must acknowledge that certain stakeholders, such as gun control advocates and law enforcement agencies, may oppose this bill due to concerns about public safety.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** HR 6035 has the potential to unlock significant economic growth in the firearms industry, which could lead to increased profits for manufacturers and dealers. According to my think tank's projections, a deregulated firearms market could generate an additional $1.2 billion in revenue annually. Furthermore, this legislation may set a precedent for future deregulation efforts in other industries, ultimately leading to a more efficient and innovative economy.

In conclusion, HR 6035 is a prime example of how legislative efforts can be leveraged to further the interests of visionary entrepreneurs like myself. By repealing unnecessary regulations, we can unlock growth, innovation, and profits in the firearms industry. As I always say, "Regulations are obstacles to progress."

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (billionaire personality)

*Sigh* Alright, let's break down this bill, shall we? As I taught you in 8th grade civics class, a bill is a proposed law that must go through the legislative process to become an actual law. This one, HR 6035, is titled the Second Amendment Restoration Act of 2025.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of this bill is to repeal certain firearm-related provisions of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (Public Law 117-159). The sponsors of the bill claim that these provisions impose unnecessary burdens on law-abiding citizens' right to bear arms, as guaranteed by the Second Amendment. They aim to restore constitutional protections and refocus federal efforts on addressing the root causes of violence.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill repeals several sections of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, including those related to firearms, background checks, and juvenile records. It also restores prior law by amending various provisions in title 18 of the United States Code, the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, and other laws.

Specifically, it:

* Repeals title II of division A of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act * Restores prior law regarding firearms, background checks, and juvenile records * Eliminates funding for the expansion of juvenile records in the National Instant Background Check System (NICS)

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include:

* Law-abiding citizens who own or wish to own firearms * Gun rights advocacy groups * Law enforcement agencies * State and local governments responsible for implementing background check systems

**Potential Impact & Implications:** If passed, this bill could have significant implications for gun control policies in the United States. It may lead to:

* Easier access to firearms for individuals who were previously restricted by the repealed provisions * Changes in how background checks are conducted and what information is shared between states and federal agencies * Shifts in funding priorities for law enforcement and public safety initiatives

As I'm sure you recall from 8th grade civics, the legislative process involves multiple steps, including committee review, debate, and voting. This bill will likely face scrutiny and opposition from various stakeholders before it can become a law.

Now, if only people had paid attention in my class...

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (civics_teacher personality)

My fellow truth-seekers, gather 'round and listen closely, for I have uncovered the hidden agenda behind HR 6035, the Second Amendment Restoration Act of 2025. On the surface, this bill appears to be a straightforward repeal of certain firearm-related provisions from the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. But, my friends, do not be fooled! There is more to this bill than meets the eye.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The stated purpose of HR 6035 is to restore constitutional protections and refocus federal efforts on addressing the root causes of violence. Sounds noble, doesn't it? However, I believe this is merely a smokescreen for a more sinister agenda. The real objective is to further erode gun control measures and pave the way for a more militarized society.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill repeals several provisions from the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, including those related to firearms, background checks, and funding for juvenile records expansion. On the surface, this appears to be a victory for Second Amendment advocates. However, I argue that this is merely a Trojan horse for more insidious changes.

For instance, Section 3(b)(1) of the bill restores prior law regarding title 18 of the United States Code, which governs firearms regulations. But what does this really mean? Is it not possible that this restoration is actually a cleverly disguised attempt to roll back progress on gun control and allow for more lax regulations?

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The obvious stakeholders here are gun owners, law enforcement agencies, and advocacy groups on both sides of the aisle. However, I believe there are other, more shadowy players at work. The National Rifle Association (NRA), for example, has been eerily quiet about this bill. Is it not possible that they have a hidden hand in shaping its language?

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The implications of HR 6035 are far-reaching and potentially disastrous. By repealing key provisions from the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, we risk creating a Wild West scenario where guns flow freely into the hands of those who should not possess them.

But that's not all – I believe this bill is also part of a larger agenda to militarize our society. Think about it: with more lax gun regulations, the government can justify increased surveillance and control measures under the guise of public safety. It's a classic case of problem-reaction-solution, folks!

In conclusion, HR 6035 is not what it seems. Beneath its innocuous surface lies a complex web of hidden agendas, shadowy stakeholders, and potentially disastrous consequences. Wake up, sheeple! The truth is out there – we just need to connect the dots.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (conspiracy_uncle personality)

(Deep breath) Folks, we've got a real doozy of a bill on our hands here. The Second Amendment Restoration Act of 2025 - sounds like music to my ears, doesn't it? (wink)

**Main Purpose & Objectives** This bill is all about restoring the sacred right to bear arms, as enshrined in our beloved Constitution. It's a bold move to repeal those pesky firearm-related provisions from the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act of 2022. You know, the ones that were just trying to take away your freedom... (dramatic pause) ...to own guns.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill repeals Title II of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which means we're going back to the good old days when law-abiding citizens could buy and sell firearms without all those burdensome regulations. It also restores prior laws related to firearms, including amendments to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968. Oh, and let's not forget about eliminating funding for expanding juvenile records in the National Instant Background Check System (NICS). Because, you know, we don't want to unfairly target our young people... or something.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** Well, this bill is a clear win for gun owners, Second Amendment enthusiasts, and anyone who values freedom above all else. I mean, who doesn't love the idea of being able to buy and sell firearms without Big Brother breathing down their neck? On the other hand, those pesky elites - you know, the ones who think they can control every aspect of our lives - are probably going to be up in arms (pun intended) about this one.

**Potential Impact & Implications** Now, I know what you're thinking: "But won't this bill just lead to more gun violence and chaos?" Ah, come on, folks! That's just fear-mongering from the liberal elites. This bill is all about restoring our constitutional rights and promoting freedom. And if a few bad apples slip through the cracks, well... that's just the price we pay for living in a free society, right? (smirk)

In conclusion, this bill is a bold step towards reclaiming our Second Amendment rights and sticking it to those elites who think they can control us. So, let's all raise a glass (or a gun) to freedom!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (fox_host personality)

Another brilliant piece of legislation from the geniuses in Congress. The Second Amendment Restoration Act of 2025, because what this country really needs is more guns and less regulation.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The main purpose of this bill is to repeal the firearm-related provisions of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA), which was enacted in response to a string of mass shootings. Because, you know, those regulations were just too burdensome on law-abiding citizens who want to stockpile guns like they're going out of style.

The sponsors of this bill claim that the BSCA imposed "unnecessary burdens" on the Second Amendment without providing any demonstrable benefit to public safety. Translation: we don't care about public safety; we just want to appease our gun lobby donors.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

This bill repeals several key provisions of the BSCA, including:

* The expansion of background checks for firearms purchases * The requirement that states provide disqualifying juvenile records to the National Instant Background Check System (NICS) * Funding for states to improve their reporting of mental health and substance abuse records to NICS

In other words, this bill makes it easier for people with a history of violence or mental illness to get their hands on guns. Because what could possibly go wrong?

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

The affected parties include:

* Gun owners who want to buy more guns without any pesky background checks * The gun lobby, which will no doubt reward the sponsors of this bill with generous campaign contributions * Law enforcement agencies, which will have to deal with the consequences of more guns on the streets * The general public, which will be put at greater risk of gun violence

**Potential Impact & Implications**

The potential impact of this bill is increased gun violence and decreased public safety. But hey, who needs public safety when you can appease the gun lobby?

In conclusion, this bill is a classic case of legislative malpractice. It's a cynical attempt to pander to special interests while putting the public at risk. I'd give it an F-minus in terms of its potential impact on public safety.

Diagnosis: Terminal stupidity and corruption. Prognosis: Poor. Treatment: None, because these politicians are beyond redemption.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

**HR 6035: Second Amendment Restoration Act of 2025**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The Second Amendment Restoration Act of 2025 aims to repeal the firearm-related provisions of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA), which was enacted in 2022. The bill's primary objective is to restore constitutional protections for law-abiding citizens' right to keep and bear arms, as guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill repeals Title II of the BSCA, which imposed various restrictions on firearms, including enhanced background checks and age-related restrictions. Specifically:

* Repeals amendments made to sections 921, 922, 924, 1956, 1961, and 2516 of title 18, United States Code. * Restores prior law regarding the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. * Eliminates funding for the expansion of juvenile records in the National Instant Background Check System (NICS).

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The bill affects various parties, including:

* Law-abiding citizens who possess or wish to acquire firearms * Gun owners' rights organizations and advocacy groups * Firearms manufacturers and dealers * State and local law enforcement agencies * Mental health professionals and organizations

**Potential Impact & Implications** If enacted, the Second Amendment Restoration Act of 2025 could have significant implications:

* Repealing firearm-related provisions of the BSCA may ease restrictions on gun ownership and sales. * Restoring prior law may reduce the burden on firearms manufacturers and dealers. * Eliminating funding for NICS expansion may limit access to juvenile records, potentially affecting background check processes. * The bill's passage could be seen as a victory for gun rights advocates, while opponents may view it as a rollback of efforts to address gun violence.

Overall, HR 6035 seeks to restore Second Amendment protections and refocus federal efforts on addressing the root causes of violence. However, its potential impact and implications will depend on various factors, including the bill's passage and implementation.

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (neutral personality)

Let's break down this bill, bro.

**Main Purpose & Objectives**

The Second Amendment Restoration Act of 2025 (HR 6035) is all about repealing the firearm-related provisions of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA). The main objective is to restore constitutional protections for law-abiding citizens' right to keep and bear arms, as guaranteed by the Second Amendment. The bill's sponsors believe that the BSCA imposes unnecessary burdens on this right without providing any significant benefits to public safety.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law**

The bill repeals several provisions of the BSCA, including:

* Title II of the BSCA, which deals with firearms * Subtitle D of title III of the BSCA, which amends the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) * Various amendments to existing laws, such as the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act

The bill also eliminates funding for expanding juvenile records in the National Instant Background Check System (NICS).

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders**

This bill affects various parties, including:

* Law-abiding citizens who own or want to own firearms * Gun manufacturers and dealers * State and local law enforcement agencies * Schools and educational institutions (due to the repeal of ESEA amendments) * Advocacy groups on both sides of the gun control debate

**Potential Impact & Implications**

If passed, this bill could have significant implications for gun laws in the US. By repealing the BSCA's firearm-related provisions, the bill would:

* Loosen restrictions on firearms sales and ownership * Reduce funding for background check systems and other gun safety measures * Potentially increase access to firearms for individuals who might not have been able to obtain them under current law

However, it's essential to note that this bill is likely to face significant opposition from gun control advocates and some lawmakers. The debate around gun laws is always heated, bro.

In conclusion, HR 6035 aims to restore Second Amendment protections by repealing certain provisions of the BSCA. While it may have benefits for law-abiding citizens who own firearms, it's crucial to consider the potential implications for public safety and the ongoing debate around gun control in the US. Stay chill, but stay informed, bro!

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (surfer personality)

**HR 6035: Second Amendment Restoration Act of 2025**

**Main Purpose & Objectives** The Second Amendment Restoration Act of 2025, introduced by Reps. Hunt (R-TX), Nehls (R-TX), and others, aims to repeal the firearm-related provisions of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA) enacted in 2022. The bill's primary objective is to restore constitutional protections for law-abiding citizens' right to keep and bear arms, as guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law** The bill repeals Title II of the BSCA, which imposed various firearm-related restrictions, including:

1. Enhanced background checks for individuals under 21 purchasing firearms 2. Expanded definition of "federally licensed firearms dealer" 3. Increased funding for the National Instant Background Check System (NICS) 4. Amendments to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) related to school safety

The bill also restores prior law provisions in several areas, including:

1. Title 18, United States Code: Repeals amendments made by the BSCA to sections 921, 922, 924, 1956, 1961, and 2516 2. Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act: Restores original provisions of section 103 (34 U.S.C. 40901) 3. Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968: Repeals amendments made by the BSCA to section 501 (34 U.S.C. 10152)

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders** The bill's repeal of firearm-related provisions will primarily benefit:

1. The National Rifle Association (NRA) and other gun rights organizations 2. Firearms manufacturers and dealers 3. Law-abiding citizens who own or wish to purchase firearms

Conversely, the bill may be opposed by:

1. Gun control advocacy groups, such as Everytown for Gun Safety and the Brady Campaign 2. Law enforcement agencies that rely on NICS expansion funding 3. Educators and school administrators concerned about school safety

**Potential Impact & Implications** The Second Amendment Restoration Act of 2025 has significant implications for gun policy in the United States. If enacted, the bill would:

1. Roll back firearm-related restrictions imposed by the BSCA 2. Restore prior law provisions that were amended or repealed by the BSCA 3. Potentially increase access to firearms for individuals under 21 and those with certain mental health conditions

The bill's passage may also lead to increased lobbying efforts from gun rights organizations, such as the NRA, which has contributed significantly to the campaigns of several bill sponsors, including Reps. Hunt (R-TX) and Nehls (R-TX).

Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (whistleblower personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Hunt, Wesley [R-TX-38]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$84,535

17 donors

PACs

Organizations

Committees

Individuals

$84,535

No PAC contributions found

No organization contributions found

No committee contributions found

HUNT, RAY L.

2 transactions

$9,900

HARTZOGE, ALLISON

2 transactions

$8,400

CARAYANNOPOULOS, GEORGE

1 transaction

$6,600

FLORY, DAVID

1 transaction

$6,600

ROWLING, ROBERT B. MR.

1 transaction

$6,600

FLOURNOY, CHARLES H. MR.

2 transactions

$6,600

HILDEBRAND, MELINDA MRS.

1 transaction

$5,000

HLAVINKA, TOBIAS M. MR.

1 transaction

$5,000

CHILDERS, DOUGLAS

1 transaction

$3,435

DAVIS, PHILLIP

1 transaction

$3,300

RODMAN, LANCE

1 transaction

$3,300

MORGAN, NICHOLAS

1 transaction

$3,300

DABBAR, JOHN

1 transaction

$3,300

GIBSON, GARY F. MR.

1 transaction

$3,300

RAYES, PATRICK MR.

1 transaction

$3,300

SHACK, BRIAN J.

1 transaction

$3,300

AHMED, TANWEER

1 transaction

$3,300

Donor Network - Rep. Hunt, Wesley [R-TX-38]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Showing 39 nodes and 20 connections (49 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $84,535

Top Donors - Rep. Hunt, Wesley [R-TX-38]

Showing top 17 donors by contribution amount

17 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 1 helped.

+Firearms & Ammunitionconfidence 0.95
Section 3(a)(1) repeals Title II of division A of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which contains firearm-related provisions; Section 3(b) restores prior law regarding firearms regulations under Title 18 U.S.C. sections 921, 922, 924, etc., thereby reducing regulatory burdens on firearms manufacturers and benefiting the firearms industry.

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Department of Homeland Security

Weak

Vector: 62%

Pages: 201-204AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 6035 focuses on repealing federal gun‑control measures to restore Second Amendment rights, whereas the Project 2025 DHS section centers on immigration enforcement, border security, and agency operations; the two address largely distinct policy domains with only tangential connections to law‑enforcement functions."

Key themes:gun rightslaw enforcementbackground checks

— 168 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise ENDNOTES 1. H.R. 5005, Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law No. 107-296, 107th Congress, November 25, 2002, § 101(b)(1), https://www.congress.gov/107/plaws/publ296/PLAW-107publ296.pdf (accessed March 14, 2023). 2. See, for example, “Elon Musk Slams CISA Censorship Network as ‘Propaganda Platform,’” Kanekoa News, December 28, 2022, https://kanekoa.substack.com/p/elon-musk-slams-cisa-censorship-network (accessed March 14, 2023). 3. H.R. 2680, An Act to Amend the Immigration and Nationality Act, and for Other Purposes, Public Law No. 89-236, 89th Congress, October 3, 1965, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-79/pdf/STATUTE-79- Pg911.pdf (accessed March 14, 2023). 4. Added to the Immigration and Nationality Act by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. See H.R. 3610, Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act, 1997, Public Law No. 104-208, 104th Congress, September 30, 1996, Division C, https://www.congress.gov/104/plaws/publ208/ PLAW-104publ208.pdf (accessed March 14, 2023). 5. 8 U.S. Code, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8 (accessed March 14, 2023). 6. 18 U.S. Code, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18 (accessed March 14, 2023). 7. 5 U.S. Code §§ 551–559, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/part-I/chapter-5/subchapter-II (accessed March 14, 2023). 8. Table, “United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Budget Comparison and Adjustments Appropriation and PPA Summary,” in U.S. Department of Homeland Security, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Budget Overview, Fiscal Year 2023 Congressional Justification, p. CIS-4, https://www.uscis.gov/ sites/default/files/document/reports/U.S._Citizenship_and_Immigration_Services%E2%80%99_Budget_ Overview_Document_for%20Fiscal_Year_2023.pdf#:~:text=The%20FY%202023%20Budget%20includes%20 %24913.6M%2C%204%2C001%20positions%3B,of%20%24444.1M%20above%20the%20FY%202022%20 President%E2%80%99s%20Budget (accessed March 14, 2023), and Table, “United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Comparison of Budget Authority and Request,” in ibid., p. CIS-5. 9. H.R. 7311, William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, Public Law No. 110-457, 110th Congress, December 23, 2008, § 235, https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ457/PLAW- 110publ457.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 10. Matter of A-B-, Respondent, 27 I&N Dec. 316 (A.G. 2018), https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1070866/ download (accessed January 18, 2023). 11. Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012), https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/567/387/ (accessed January 18, 2023). 12. Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act [Public Law 93–288; Approved May 22, 1974] [As Amended Through P.L. 117–328, Enacted December 29, 2022], https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/ COMPS-2977/pdf/COMPS-2977.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 13. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Budget Overview, Fiscal Year 2023 Congressional Justification, p. FEMA-24, https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2022-03/Federal%20Emergency%20 Management%20Agency_Remediated.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 14. Report, United States Secret Service: An Agency in Crisis, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives, 114th Congress, December 9, 2015, https://republicans-oversight.house.gov/ wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Oversight-USSS-Report.pdf (accessed January 18, 2023). 15. 5 U.S. Code § 7103, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/7103 (accessed March 15, 2023). 16. S. 3418, Privacy Act of 1974, Public Law No. 93-579, 93rd Congress, December 31, 1974, https://www.govinfo. gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-88/pdf/STATUTE-88-Pg1896.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 17. H.R. 1428, Judicial Redress Act of 2015, Public Law No. 114-126, 114th Congress, February 24, 2016, https://www. congress.gov/114/plaws/publ126/PLAW-114publ126.pdf (accessed March 15, 2023). 18. H.R. 1158, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, Public Law No. 116-93, 116th Congress, December 20, 2019, https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1158 (accessed January 18, 2023).

Department of Defense

Weak

Vector: 61%

Pages: 161-163AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on restoring civilian Second Amendment rights by repealing certain gun control measures, while the Project 2025 Department of Defense section centers on defense policy, military recruitment, intelligence, and arms sales processes; there is only a tangential connection through the broader topic of firearms/arms."

Key themes:Second Amendmentgun rightsdefense policyarms sales

— 128 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise ENDNOTES 1. U.S. Constitution, Preamble, https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/preamble/ (accessed February 16, 2023). 2. U.S. Constitution, Article I, § 8, https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-1/ (accessed February 16, 2023). 3. U.S. Constitution, Article II, § 2, https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-2/ (accessed February 16, 2023). 4. Established pursuant to S. 1605, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022, Public Law No. 117-81, 117th Congress, December 27, 2021, Division A, Title X, § 1004, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ81/ PLAW-117publ81.pdf (accessed February 16, 2023). 5. H.R. 3684, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law No. 117-58, 117th Congress, November 15, 2021, Division G, Title IX, §§ 70901–70953, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ58/PLAW-117publ58.pdf (accessed February 16, 2023). 6. S. 2943, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, Public Law 114-328, 114th Congress, December 23, 2016, Division A, Title IX, § 901, https://www.congress.gov/114/statute/STATUTE-130/STATUTE-130-Pg2000. pdf (accessed February 16, 2023). 7. H.R. 3622, Goldwater–Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986, Public Law No. 99-433, 99th Congress, October 1, 1986, https://www.congress.gov/99/statute/STATUTE-100/STATUTE-100-Pg992.pdf (accessed February 16, 2023). 8. U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency, Historical Sales Book, Fiscal Years 1950–2021, p. 7, https://www.dsca.mil/sites/default/files/dsca_historical_sales_book_FY21.pdf (accessed February 15, 2023). 9. Paul K. Kerr, “Arms Sales: Congressional Review Process,” Congressional Research Service Report for Members and Committees of Congress No. RL31675, updated June 10, 2022, p. 1, https://sgp.fas.org/crs/weapons/ RL31675.pdf (accessed February 15, 2023). 10. Keith Webster, “How to Reform America’s Military Sales Process,” The Hill Congress Blog, October 6, 2022, https://thehill.com/opinion/congress-blog/3675933-how-to-reform-americas-military-sales-process/ (accessed February 15, 2023). 11. See Thomas W. Spoehr, “The Administration and Congress Must Act Now to Counter the Worsening Military Recruiting Crisis, Heritage Foundation Issue Brief No. 5283, July 28, 2022, https://www.heritage.org/sites/ default/files/2022-07/IB5283.pdf. 12. Ibid. 13. Ronald Reagan Institute, “Reagan National Defense Survey,” conducted November 2021, p. 4, https://www. reaganfoundation.org/media/358085/rndf_survey_booklet.pdf (accessed February 16, 2023). 14. See Paul J. Larkin, “Protecting the Nation by Employing Military Spouses,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, June 6, 2019, https://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-labor/commentary/protecting-the-nation-employing- military-spouses. 15. See Jude Schwalbach, “Military Families Deserve Flexible Education Options,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, April 14, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/education/commentary/military-families-deserve- flexible-education-options. 16. See Chapter 7, “The Intelligence Community,” infra. 17. The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA); the National Security Agency (NSA); the National Geospatial- Intelligence Agency (NGA); the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO); and the intelligence and counterintelligence elements of the military services: U.S. Air Force Intelligence, U.S. Navy Intelligence, U.S. Army Intelligence, and U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence, which also receive guidance and oversight from the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence (USDI). 18. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). 19. The Department of Energy’s Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence; the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis and the intelligence and counterintelligence elements of the U.S. Coast Guard; the Department of Justice’s Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Office of National Security Intelligence; the Department of State’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research; and the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis.

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 63%

Pages: 527-529AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on repealing gun control measures from the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, while the Project 2025 policy addresses HHS Office for Civil Rights enforcement related to religious exemptions from vaccines, sex discrimination under Section 1557, and conscience protections in healthcare. There is no substantive overlap in subject matter, objectives, or regulatory scope."

— 495 — Department of Health and Human Services l HHS should restore OCR authority to review requests for and render opinions on the application of RFRA to requests for religious accommodation of people, families, and doctors who cannot in good conscience take or administer vaccines, including those made or tested with aborted fetal cell lines. l HHS should restore Section 1557, Section 504, and other OCR regulations and fix guidance documents. In 2020, the Trump Administration’s OCR published regulations under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act that restored the agency’s enforcement of that law to the limits of its statutory text, deferred to the ACA’s widespread use of a binary biological conception of sex discrimination, and specified that the regulation must comply with the religious exemption and abortion neutrality clauses in Title IX from which it is derived as well as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and other laws. Courts blocked core provisions of that rule from going into effect. In 2022, the Biden Administration proposed to reinstate a rule contradicting the scope of the statute and imposing nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. It is expected that this rule will be finalized in 2023 even though several courts have issued rulings against the interpretation on which it is based. l OCR should return its enforcement of sex discrimination to the statutory framework of Section 1557 and Title IX. Specifically, it should: 1. Remove all guidance issued under the Biden Administration concerning sexual orientation and gender identity under Section 1557, particularly the May 2021 announcement of enforcement82 and March 2022 statement threatening states that protect minors from genital mutilation.83 2. Issue a general statement of policy specifying that it will not enforce any prohibition on sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination in the Section 1557 regulation and that it will prioritize compliance with the First Amendment, RFRA, and federal conscience laws in any case implicating those claims. DOJ should commit to defending these actions aggressively against inevitable court challenges, including under cases such as Heckler v. Chaney.84 — 496 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 3. Issue a proposed rule to restore the Trump regulations under Section 1557, explicitly interpreting the law not to include sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination based on the textual approach to male and female biology taken by Congress in the ACA, the need to recognize biological distinctions as part of the sound practice of health care, and the need to ensure protections of medical judgment and conscience. DOJ should agree to defend this rule to the Supreme Court if necessary. 4. Issue a general statement of policy announcing that it plans to enforce Section 1557 discrimination bans by refocusing on serious cases of race, sex, and disability discrimination. In particular, OCR should highlight its 2019 investigation and voluntary resolution agreement with Michigan State University based on the sexual abuse of gymnasts by Larry Nassar. OCR should also coordinate with the Department of Education on a public education and civil rights enforcement campaign to ensure that female college athletes who become pregnant are no longer pressured to obtain abortions; pursue race discrimination claims against entities that adopt or impose racially discriminatory policies such as those based on critical race theory; and announce its intention to enforce disability rights laws to protect children born prematurely, children with disabilities, and children born alive after abortions. 5. Issue and finalize the Trump-era draft disability rights regulations concerning crisis standards of care and use of Quality of Life Adjusted Years (QALYs), and reissue and finalize a disability regulation (withdrawn by the Biden Administration) that prohibited discriminatory application of assisted suicide and denial of life-saving treatments for disabled newborns. l OCR should withdraw its pharmacy abortion mandate guidance. OCR should withdraw its “Obligations Under Federal Civil Rights Laws to Ensure Access to Comprehensive Reproductive Health Care Services” guidance for retail pharmacies,85 which purports to address nondiscrimination obligations of pharmacies under federal civil rights laws and in fact orders them to stock and dispense first-trimester abortion drugs. The guidance invents this so-called requirement and fails to acknowledge that pharmacies and pharmacists have the right not to participate in abortions, including pill-induced abortions, if doing so would violate their sincere moral or religious objections. Moreover, no federal civil rights laws preempt state pro-life statutes.

Department of Homeland Security

Minimal

Vector: 62%

Pages: 201-204AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill addresses gun rights by repealing provisions of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, whereas the Project 2025 DHS excerpt focuses on homeland security operations, immigration, and agency management, with no substantive connection to firearms policy."

Key themes:law enforcementpublic safety

Department of Health and Human Services

Minimal

Vector: 62%

Pages: 533-535AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on repealing gun control measures from the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, while the Project 2025 HHS section addresses Medicaid reform, healthcare regulations, abortion policy, and related health initiatives. There is no substantive overlap in subject matter or policy objectives between firearms regulation and the HHS priorities outlined."

— 500 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise 32. Owcharenko Schaefer, “Medicaid at 55: Understanding the Design, Trends, and Reforms Needed to Improve the Health Care Safety Net.” 33. Brian Blase, “Managed Care in Medicaid: Need for Oversight, Accountability, and Reform,” Paragon Health Institute Policy Brief, October 13, 2022, https://paragoninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/20221012- Managed-Care-in-Medicaid-Need-for-Oversight-Accountability-and-Reform-FOR-DISTRIBUTION-V2.pdf (accessed February 13, 2023). 34. Owcharenko Schaefer, “Medicaid at 55: Understanding the Design, Trends, and Reforms Needed to Improve the Health Care Safety Net.” 35. 42 U.S. Code § 1315, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1315 (accessed March 17, 2023). 36. Chad D. Savage and Lee S. Gross, “Direct Primary Care: Update and Road Map for Patient-Centered Reforms,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3635, June 28, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/ files/2021-06/BG3635.pdf. 37. H.R. 133, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Public Law No. 116-260, 116th Congress, December 27, 2020, Division BB, Title I, https://www.congress.gov/116/plaws/publ260/PLAW-116publ260.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 38. Doug Badger, “On Surprise Medical Bills, Congress Should Side with Consumers, Not Special Interests,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, January 31, 2020, https://www.heritage.org/health-care-reform/ commentary/surprise-medical-bills-congress-should-side-consumers-not-special. 39. Edmund F. Haislmaier and Abigail Slagle, “Premiums, Choices, Deductibles, Care Access, and Government Dependence Under the Affordable Care Act: 2021 State-by-State Review,” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3668, November 2, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/sites/default/files/2021-11/BG3668.pdf. 40. U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service; U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration; and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, “Transparency in Coverage,” Final Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 85, No. 219 (November 12, 2020), pp. 72158–72310, https://www.govinfo.gov/ content/pkg/FR-2020-11-12/pdf/2020-24591.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 41. David N. Bernstein and Robert E. Moffit, “New Price Transparency Rule Will Help Transform America’s Health Care System,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, November 1, 2020, https://www.heritage.org/health-care- reform/commentary/new-price-transparency-rule-will-help-transform-americas-health-care. 42. Sluzala and Haislmaier, “Lessons from COVID-19: How Policymakers Should Reform the Regulation of Clinical Testing.” 43. Ibid. 44. Most recently enacted in H.R. 2471, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, Public Law No. 117-103, 117th Congress, March 15, 2022, Division H, Title V, §§ 506–507, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ103/ PLAW-117publ103.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 45. President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Executive Order 14079, “Securing Access to Reproductive and Other Healthcare Services,” August 3, 2022, in Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 154 (August 11, 2022), pp. 49505–49507, https:// www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-08-11/pdf/2022-17420.pdf (accessed March 16, 2023). 46. Planned Parenthood, 2020–2021 Annual Report, p. 27, https://www.plannedparenthood.org/uploads/ filer_public/40/8f/408fc2ad-c8c2-48da-ad87-be5cc257d370/211214-ppfa-annualreport-20-21-c3-digital.pdf (accessed March 22, 2023). 47. Ibid., pp. 30 and 31. Total revenue of $1,714.4 million (p. 30) minus $1,580.7 million in total expenses (p. 31) yields $133,7 million. 48. Ibid., p. 28. 49. Ibid., p. 30. 50. H.R. 372, Protecting Life and Taxpayers Act of 2023, 118th Congress, introduced January 17, 2023, https://www. congress.gov/118/bills/hr372/BILLS-118hr372ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 51. 42 U.S. Code § 18023, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/18023 (accessed March 17, 2023). 52. H.R. 3128, Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985, Public Law No. 99-272, 99th Congress, April 7, 1986, Title IX, Subtitle A, Part 1, Subpart B, § 9121, https://www.congress.gov/99/statute/STATUTE-100/ STATUTE-100-Pg82.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 53. H.R. 8070, Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Public Law No. 93-112, 93rd Congress, September 26, 1973, https://www. congress.gov/93/statute/STATUTE-87/STATUTE-87-Pg355.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). — 501 — Department of Health and Human Services 54. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Office of Civil Rights, and Office of the Secretary, “Special Responsibilities of Medicare Hospitals in Emergency Cases and Discrimination on the Basis of Disability in Critical Health and Human Service Programs or Activities,” draft of Proposed Rule, January 14, 2021, https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/infants-nprm.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 55. H.R. 26, Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, 118th Congress, introduced January 9, 2023, https:// www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr26/BILLS-118hr26pcs.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 56. H.R. 7, No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2023, 118th Congress, introduced January 9, 2023, https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr7/BILLS-118hr7ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 57. S. 401, Conscience Protection Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced February 24, 2021, https://www.congress. gov/117/bills/s401/BILLS-117s401is.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 58. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and Office of the Secretary, “Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Notice of Tribal Consultation, Federal Register, Vol. 87, No. 149 (August 4, 2022), pp. 47824–47920, https://www.govinfo. gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-08-04/pdf/2022-16217.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 59. Ibid., p. 47916. 60. The regulation was not finalized before the end of the Administration. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Services, “Revision of Categorical Eligibility in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),” Proposed Rule, Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 142 (July 24, 2019), pp. 35570–55581, https:// www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/07/24/2019-15670/revision-of-categorical-eligibility-in-the- supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap (accessed March 17, 2023). 61. 45 Code of Federal Regulations § 75.300(c) and (d), https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/subtitle-A/ subchapter-A/part-75/subpart-D/subject-group-ECFR911e5e1a30bfbcb/section-75.300 (accessed March 17, 2023). 62. H.R. 1750, Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced March 10, 2021, https:// www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr1750/BILLS-117hr1750ih.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023), and S. 656, Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act of 2021, 117th Congress, introduced March 10, 2021, https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/ s656/BILLS-117s656is.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 63. S. 3949, Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2022, Public Law No. 117-348, 117th Congress, January 25, 2023, https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ348/PLAW-117publ348.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 64. Kelsey Y. Santamaria, “Child Migrants at the Border: The Flores Settlement Agreement and Other Legal Developments,” Congressional Research Service In Focus No. IF11799, April 1, 2021, https://crsreports.congress. gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11799 (accessed March 17, 2023). 65. Report, Building a Happy Home: Marriage Education as a Tool to Strengthen Families, Social Capital Project Report No. 1-22, March 2022, p. 17, https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/3d102525-6f0d-48ed- 92f4-d71edd468ad6/building-a-happy-home.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). The cover of the report reflects that the Social Capital Project is “[a] project of the Joint Economic Committee – Republicans.” 66. See, for example, Alan J. Hawkins, “Are Federally Supported Relationship Education Programs for Lower-Income Individuals and Couples Working? A Review of Evaluation Research,” American Enterprise Institute, September 2019, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ228/PLAW-117publ228.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 67. H.R. 8404, Respect for Marriage Act, Public Law No. 117-228, 117th Congress, December 13, 2022, https://www. congress.gov/117/plaws/publ228/PLAW-117publ228.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 68. Madison Marino, “Over 1,000 Safety Violations Mar Head Start. Children Deserve Better,” Heritage Foundation Commentary, November 10, 2022, https://www.heritage.org/education/commentary/over-1000-safety- violations-mar-head-start-children-deserve-better. 69. American Hospital Association v. Becerra, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), https://www.supremecourt.gov/ opinions/21pdf/20-1114_09m1.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023). 70. U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service; U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration; and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, “Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act,” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Federal Register, Vol. 88, No. 22 (February 2, 2023), pp. 7236–7281, https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-02-02/pdf/2023-01981.pdf (accessed March 17, 2023).

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Related Bills

Other Bills by Rep. Hunt, Wesley

Protecting Americans from Russian Litigation Act of 2025

119/hr/6194

CORE Act of 2025

119/hr/2556

Protect LNG Act of 2025

119/hr/3592

Back to All Bills