PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.1924 / 106th Congress

Federal Agency Compliance Act

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 574.

Official summary

Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Oct 12, 2000

Federal Agency Compliance Act - Requires a Federal agency, in civil matters, in administering a statute, rule, regulation, program, or policy (statute) within a judicial circuit, to adhere to the existing precedent respecting the interpretation and application of such statute, as established by the decisions of the U.S. court of appeals for that circuit, with exceptions.Allows an agency to take a position, either in administration or litigation, that is at variance with such precedent if: (1) it is uncertain whether the administration of the statute will be subject to review by the appeals court that established that precedent or a court of appeals for another circuit; (2) the Government did not seek further review of the case in which that precedent was first established in that appeals court or the U.S. Supreme Court because neither the United States nor any agency or officer thereof was a party to the case, or because the Solicitor General, or the agency officer responsible for such determination, determines that the decision establishing that precedent was otherwise substantially favorable to the Government; or (3) it is reasonable to question the continued validity of that precedent in light of a subsequent decision of that appeals court or the U.S. Supreme Court, a subsequent change in any pertinent statute or regulation, or any other subsequent change in the public policy or circumstances on which that precedent was based.Requires the officers of any Federal agency supervising the conduct of litigation to ensure that the initiation, defense, and continuation of proceedings in the U.S. courts within, or subject to the jurisdiction of, a particular judicial circuit avoids unnecessarily repetitive litigation on questions of law already uniformly resolved against the United States in three or more circuits. Specifies that a decision on whether to initiate, defend, or continue litigation is not subject to review.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Gekas, George W. [R-PA-17] · R–PA

Committees

  • Judiciary Committee
0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

    Actions

    A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

    1. Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 574.

    2. Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 106-976.

    3. Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 106-976.

    4. Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.

    5. Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

    6. Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.

    7. Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

    8. Subcommittee Hearings Held.

    9. Referred to the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law.

    10. Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

    11. Introduced in House

    12. Introduced in House

    Bill text & related measures

    Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

    Related bills identified by Congress.gov

    No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

    Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

    Explore the bill from different angles

    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.

    Neutral evidence review

    Objective

    Analyze H.R.1924 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Fairness and public impact

    Progressive lens

    Examine H.R.1924 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Institutions and government scope

    Conservative lens

    Examine H.R.1924 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Individual rights and government power

    Liberty lens

    Examine H.R.1924 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.

    View full prompt & sources