Federal Consent Decree Fairness Act
Latest action · Jul 19, 2005 Committee on the Judiciary. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 109-181.
Progress
Where this bill reached, and when. A stage with no date was not reached; one that failed a vote and later carried shows the date it carried.
- IntroducedMar 1, 2005
- Passed SenateNot reached
- Passed HouseNot reached
- To the PresidentNot reached
- Became lawNot reached
Summary
Federal Consent Decree Fairness Act - Authorizes State or local governments and related officials sued in their official capacity to file a motion to modify or vacate a consent decree upon the earlier of: (1) four years after the consent decree is originally entered; or (2) in the case of a civil action in which a State is a party or in which a local government is a party and the surrounding State is not a party, the expiration of the term of office of the highest elected State or local government official authorizing the consent decree.
Places the burden of proof with respect to such motions on the party originally filing the action to demonstrate that continued enforcement is necessary to uphold a Federal right.
Nullifies consent decrees pending a ruling on a motion to modify or vacate if the court fails to rule on such motion within 90 days of filing.
Addresses compensation and termination of special masters overseeing consent decrees.
Makes this Act applicable to all consent decrees regardless of: (1) the date on which the final order of a consent decree is entered; or (2) whether any relief has been obtained before enactment.
Cosponsors 26
Members who signed on, in the order they did. Signatures ran from Mar 1, 2005 to Jul 27, 2006; 2 are original cosponsors, there from the day it was introduced.
| Seat | Cosponsor | Signed on | |
|---|---|---|---|
| R-TX | John Cornyn | Original | Mar 1, 2005 |
| R-AZ | Jon Kyl | Original | Mar 1, 2005 |
| D-NE | Ben Nelson | Mar 2, 2005 | |
| D-AR | Mark L. Pryor | Mar 2, 2005 | |
| R-OR | Gordon H. Smith | Mar 4, 2005 | |
| R-OK | James M. Inhofe | Mar 4, 2005 | |
| R-VA | John Warner | Mar 4, 2005 | |
| R-TX | Kay Bailey Hutchison | Mar 4, 2005 | |
| R-ID | Larry E. Craig | Mar 4, 2005 | |
| R-KY | Mitch McConnell | Mar 4, 2005 | |
| R-KS | Pat Roberts | Mar 4, 2005 | |
| R-NM | Pete V. Domenici | Mar 4, 2005 | |
| R-PA | Rick Santorum | Mar 4, 2005 | |
| R-UT | Robert F. Bennett | Mar 4, 2005 | |
| R-MS | Thad Cochran | Mar 4, 2005 | |
| R-MS | Trent Lott | Mar 4, 2005 | |
| R-GA | Saxby Chambliss | Mar 9, 2005 | |
| R-NH | Judd Gregg | Mar 10, 2005 | |
| R-SC | Lindsey Graham | Mar 10, 2005 | |
| R-NV | John Ensign | Mar 14, 2005 | |
| R-GA | Johnny Isakson | Mar 14, 2005 | |
| R-MT | Conrad R. Burns | Apr 5, 2005 | |
| R-UT | Orrin G. Hatch | Apr 11, 2005 | |
| R-AK | Lisa Murkowski | Jun 7, 2005 | |
| R-SD | John Thune | Jul 21, 2005 | |
| R-NH | John E. Sununu | Jul 27, 2006 |
Committees 1
Where it was sent and what each committee and subcommittee did with it, in order.
| Chamber | Committee | What it did |
|---|---|---|
| Senate | Judiciary Committee | Referred Mar 2, 2005Hearings Jul 19, 2005 |
Actions 3
Everything that happened, newest first.
- Jul 19, 2005Committee on the Judiciary. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 109-181.
- Mar 1, 2005Introduced in Senate
- Mar 1, 2005Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1877)
In the Congressional Record 4
Days the Record’s own index lists this bill, newest first, with the pages and the members it names. Pages starting H are the House, S the Senate, E Extensions of Remarks.
| Where | In the Record | Members | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Senate | Debate and remarks S3414 | Lamar Alexander R-TN | Apr 24, 2006 |
| Senate | Debate and remarks S3342 | Lamar Alexander R-TN | Apr 7, 2005 |
| Senate | Debate and remarks S2063–S2069 | Christopher J. Dodd D-CT, Jeff Sessions R-AL, Jon Kyl R-AZ, Lamar Alexander R-TN | Mar 4, 2005 |
| Senate | Text printed S1877 | Lamar Alexander R-TN (text) | Mar 1, 2005 |
Research
What has been written about this bill: committee reports, cost estimates, the sponsor’s authority statement, printed hearings and the Congressional Research Service’s work.
Printed hearings 4
Hearings whose printed record names this bill, newest first: hearings on it, and wider hearings where it came up.
| Number | Hearing | Committee | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| S. Hrg. 109-649 | CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2007527 pages | Budget Committee | Feb 2, 2006–Mar 2, 2006 |
| S. Hrg. 109-181 | A REVIEW OF FEDERAL CONSENT DECREES115 pages | Judiciary Committee | Jul 19, 2005 |
| Serial No. 109-43 | FEDERAL CONSENT DECREE FAIRNESS ACT96 pages | Judiciary Committee | Jun 21, 2005 |
| Serial No. 109-3 | CHILD INTERSTATE ABORTION NOTIFICATION ACT80 pages | Judiciary Committee | Mar 3, 2005 |
Related bills 1
Companion bills and other measures the record links to this one.
| Bill | Title | Relationship | Latest action |
|---|---|---|---|
| HR 1229 | Federal Consent Decree Fairness Act | Related bill | Jun 13, 2006 |
Titles 2
Every title it has carried, official and short, at each stage.
- Official Title as Introduced
- A bill to amend chapter 111 of title 28, United States Code, to limit the duration of Federal consent decrees to which State and local governments are a party, and for other purposes.
- Short Titles as Introduced
- Federal Consent Decree Fairness Act
Subjects
Assigned by the Library of Congress. Policy area: Law.
Text 1
Each version as it was printed, newest first.
- Mar 1, 2005Introduced in Senate
Everything here is as published by Congress: the summary is the Congressional Research Service's, the action wording is the clerks', and the subjects are the Library of Congress's. How far it got is read from the actions themselves, taking the most recent one of each kind, so a bill that failed a vote and later passed is shown as having passed. Records come from this bill on Congress.gov and govinfo.gov; cost estimates are the Congressional Budget Office's, and the hearings are the printed hearings GovInfo publishes, which can appear months after the hearing.