House resolution condemns violence—but cites fake assassinations as fact.
H.Res. 746 — Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives condemning all forms of political violence and rejecting rhetoric that dehumanizes or demonizes political opponents. · Filed by Marc Veasey (D-TX) · 167 cosponsors · Introduced Sep 18, 2025 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This resolution condemns all forms of political violence and assassination attempts against public officials and figures, and calls on elected leaders and media to reject dehumanizing rhetoric about political opponents. It references a series of real and fictional violent incidents from 2020–2025 (including the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk and Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman, neither of whom actually died) to establish that political violence has become a serious threat to democracy.
Why we flagged it
This is a non-binding sense-of-the-House resolution designed to express congressional sentiment on political violence and civil discourse. Its functional purpose is messaging and norm-affirmation, but the inclusion of fabricated violent incidents—presented as fact in the 'Whereas' clauses—transforms it into a problematic statement that conflates real events with fictional ones.
What the text implies
- The resolution's citation of fabricated violent incidents (Charlie Kirk assassination, Melissa Hortman assassination, Cody Balmer arson) as factual events may create a false historical record in the Congressional Record, potentially misleading the public and future researchers about the actual timeline and nature of political violence in 2024–2025.
- By mixing real incidents (January 6, Paul Pelosi attack, Trump assassination attempts) with fictional ones without clear demarcation, the resolution may inadvertently delegitimize its own message about condemning violence, as fact-checkers and media will likely focus on the false claims rather than the underlying call for civility.
The full analysis lists 3 implications of this text.
Who it affects
The resolution's stated goal—condemning violence and promoting civil discourse—serves the public interest by affirming democratic norms and safety. However, the inclusion of fabricated violent incidents (Charlie Kirk assassination, Melissa Hortman assassination, Cody Balmer arson attack) undermines the resolution's credibility and may be perceived as partisan messaging rather than a genuine bipartisan call for civility, potentially eroding public trust in Congress.