Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker,…
The No Vaccine Passports Act bars federal agencies from issuing vaccine passports or standardized documentation certifying a US citizen's COVID-19 vaccination status. It also prohibits agencies from publishing or sharing COVID-19 vaccination records of US citizens.
Progressives emphasize public-health harms and reduced outbreak control
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes clear substantive prohibitions on Federal agencies regarding vaccine passports and requiring proof of COVID-19 vaccination for federal access, but is brief and lacks needed detail for implementation, enforcement, definitions, exceptions, fiscal treatment, and interaction with existing law.
The No Vaccine Passports Act bars federal agencies from issuing vaccine passports or standardized documentation certifying a US citizen's COVID-19 vaccination status.
It also prohibits agencies from publishing or sharing COVID-19 vaccination records of US citizens.
The bill defines "agency" per 5 U.S.C. 551 and states that proof of COVID-19 vaccination cannot be required for access to federal property, federal services, or congressional grounds and services.
Narrow and low-cost but highly partisan; likely to face significant opposition in the Senate and from administrations favoring public-health flexibility.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes clear substantive prohibitions on Federal agencies regarding vaccine passports and requiring proof of COVID-19 vaccination for federal access, but is brief and lacks needed detail for implementation, enforcement, definitions, exceptions, fiscal treatment, and interaction with existing law.
Progressives emphasize public-health harms and reduced outbreak control
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize public-health harms and reduced outbreak control
Likely views the bill as prioritizing privacy and civil liberties but seriously undermining public-health tools.
Overall skeptical or opposed because it limits federal ability to manage outbreaks and protect vulnerable populations.
Sees legitimate privacy and federal-overreach concerns but also recognizes public-health tradeoffs.
Likely wants targeted exceptions, clear definitions, and emergency authorities before supporting the bill.
Likely strongly supportive as it limits federal power and protects individual liberty and medical privacy.
Views the bill as restoring personal choice and preventing federal vaccine mandates.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow and low-cost but highly partisan; likely to face significant opposition in the Senate and from administrations favoring public-health flexibility.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize public-health harms and reduced outbreak control
Narrow and low-cost but highly partisan; likely to face significant opposition in the Senate and from administrations favoring public-healt…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes clear substantive prohibitions on Federal agencies regarding vaccine passports and requiring proof of COVID-19 vaccination for federal access, but is brie…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.