H.R. 988 (119th)Bill Overview

To amend title 36, United States Code, to move the place of incorporation and domicile of the National Woman's…

Government Operations and Politics|Government Operations and PoliticsIllinois
Sponsor
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
Feb 5, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

This bill amends Title 36 of the U.S. Code to change the National Woman’s Relief Corps’ legal place of incorporation and domicile from the District of Columbia to Illinois, relocate its principal office to Murphysboro, Illinois, and update service-of-process provisions to designate Illinois officials (Secretary of State or other Illinois-designated office) instead of District of Columbia officials.

Why people may split

Progressives emphasize nondiscrimination and member access concerns

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused administrative/operational statute that uses precise textual amendments to the U.S. Code to relocate a corporation's statutory domicile and principal office.

This bill amends Title 36 of the U.S. Code to change the National Woman’s Relief Corps’ legal place of incorporation and domicile from the District of Columbia to Illinois, relocate its principal office to Murphysboro, Illinois, and update service-of-process provisions to designate Illinois officials (Secretary of State or other Illinois-designated office) instead of District of Columbia officials.

Passage75/100

Very narrow, administrative change with minimal fiscal or ideological implications; likely to succeed absent procedural objections.

CredibilityAligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused administrative/operational statute that uses precise textual amendments to the U.S. Code to relocate a corporation's statutory domicile and principal office. The mechanism is explicit and directly integrated into identified U.S.C. sections.

Contention10/100

Progressives emphasize nondiscrimination and member access concerns

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
States · Local governmentsLikely burdened

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • StatesPlaces organization under Illinois corporate and administrative law, simplifying state-level governance and compliance.
  • StatesDesignates Illinois Secretary of State for service of process, creating a single, clear state-level agent for legal mat…
  • Local governmentsMoves principal office to Murphysboro could increase local economic activity and civic engagement in that community.
Likely burdened
  • Potential burdenLoss of District of Columbia domicile may reduce access to DC-specific legal or administrative arrangements.
  • Potential burdenTransition could impose administrative costs to update records, filings, and notify stakeholders.
  • Potential burdenSubjecting governance to Illinois law may change regulatory requirements for meetings, filings, or governance.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Progressives emphasize nondiscrimination and member access concerns
Progressive80%

This is a narrowly targeted, administrative change moving a federally chartered patriotic organization's legal home and principal office to Illinois.

It is likely viewed as low-stakes; supportive if it preserves the group's mission, membership access, and nondiscrimination obligations.

Leans supportive
Centrist85%

This appears to be a pragmatic, administrative update responding to the organization’s preference for Illinois domicile and Murphysboro headquarters.

Centrists will favor clear, low-cost implementation and seek clarity on legal, fiscal, and procedural consequences.

Leans supportive
Conservative75%

A routine move of a private patriotic group's federal charter details to a state location will be seen positively as respecting organizational autonomy and state-level administration.

Conservatives will like reduced DC-centricism and limited federal entanglement.

Leans supportive
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood75/100

Very narrow, administrative change with minimal fiscal or ideological implications; likely to succeed absent procedural objections.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • No cost estimate or CBO-like analysis included
  • Text does not state whether the organization requested the change
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Progressives emphasize nondiscrimination and member access concerns

Very narrow, administrative change with minimal fiscal or ideological implications; likely to succeed absent procedural objections.

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused administrative/operational statute that uses precise textual amendments to the U.S. Code to relocate a corporation's statutory domicile and prin…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis