To require the name of military installation under jurisdiction of Secretary of the Army located in Fayetteville, North Carolina, to be known and designated as Fort Bragg, and for other purposes.
- Bill Number
- H.R. 1214
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Armed Forces and National Security
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-02-11: Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
- Last Updated
- 2026-06-11T20:41:33Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
This bill (H.R. 1214) aims to officially rename a U.S. Army military installation in Fayetteville, North Carolina, from its current name back to "Fort Bragg." The purpose is to update federal references and designations to reflect this change, honoring the historical name associated with the base.
Key Provisions
- Designation of Name: After the bill's enactment, the military installation under the Secretary of the Army's jurisdiction in Fayetteville, North Carolina, must be known and designated as "Fort Bragg."
- Updating References: Any mention of this installation in U.S. laws, regulations, maps, documents, records, or other official papers will be interpreted as referring to "Fort Bragg."
- Definition: The term "military installation" is defined as per section 2801 of title 10, United States Code (which generally means a base, camp, post, station, yard, center, homeport facility, or other real property under Department of Defense control for military activities).
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- This bill would reverse the 2023 renaming of the installation to "Fort Liberty," which occurred as part of a broader Department of Defense initiative to remove Confederate-associated names from military bases (initiated under the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021).
- It introduces a mandatory update to all federal references, ensuring consistency without requiring separate amendments to existing statutes or documents.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: The Department of the Army and other federal entities (e.g., Department of Defense) would need to update signage, official records, websites, and communications, potentially incurring administrative costs for rebranding but no major operational changes.
- On Citizens: Local residents, businesses, and veterans in Fayetteville and surrounding areas may see restored historical recognition of the "Fort Bragg" name, which could boost community pride or tourism but might also spark debate among those who supported the prior name change for reasons of inclusivity.
- On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though it could indirectly affect perceptions of U.S. military naming conventions abroad, particularly in discussions about historical symbols.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- U.S. Army and Department of Defense: Responsible for implementing the name change and updating all related materials.
- Local Community in Fayetteville, North Carolina: Including residents, local government, and businesses tied to the base's identity and economy.
- Military Personnel and Veterans: Active-duty soldiers, families, and alumni associated with the installation, who may have personal or historical ties to the "Fort Bragg" name.
- Congress and Policymakers: The bill's sponsor (Rep. Self) and the House Committee on Armed Services, which would oversee its progress.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: As a straightforward naming statute, it leverages Congress's authority over military installations (under Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, which grants power to "make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces"). It does not require presidential approval beyond standard bill passage, but implementation could face challenges if conflicting executive policies exist.
- Constitutional: No major issues, as naming federal properties falls within congressional plenary power; however, it could invite First Amendment debates if viewed as endorsing historical figures (e.g., Braxton Bragg, a Confederate general).
- Political: The bill reflects ongoing partisan divides over Confederate symbols in public spaces, potentially reigniting national debates on history, race, and military heritage. Passage would signal a reversal of prior Biden-era policies, influencing future base-naming decisions.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Recent Actions
- 2025-02-11: Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
- 2025-02-11: Introduced in House
- 2025-02-11: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- To require the name of military installation under jurisdiction of Secretary of the Army located in Fayetteville, North Carolina, to be known and designated as Fort Bragg, and for other purposes. — issued 2025-02-11 — PDF (2 pages)