PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 16, 1995
Amends the Federal judicial code to make an exception to foreign sovereign immunity in cases in which money damages are sought against a foreign state for personal injury or death or economic harm that was caused by an act of torture, extrajudicial killing, aircraft sabotage, hostage taking, or the provision of material support or resources to terrorists. Specifies that such an action shall not be maintained unless: (1) the claimant first affords the foreign state a reasonable opportunity to arbitrate the claim in accordance with accepted international rules of arbitration; and (2) the act upon which the claim is based occurred while the individual bringing the claim was a U.S. national and while a determination was in effect under the Export Administration Act of 1979 or the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 that the government of that foreign state repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism. Makes an exception to immunity from attachment or execution where the judgment relates to a claim for which the foreign state is not immune under this Act, regardless of whether the property is or was involved with the act upon which the claim is based.
People & committees
Rep. Fox, Jon D. [R-PA-13] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Nov 15, 2019. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1877 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1877 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1877 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1877 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.