PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jan 8, 2016
Fairness in Class Action Litigation and Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency Act of 2016
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the federal judicial code to prohibit federal courts from certifying any proposed class seeking monetary relief for personal injury or economic loss unless the party seeking to maintain such a class action affirmatively demonstrates that each proposed class member suffered an injury of the same type and scope as the injury of the named class representatives.
A court's certification of such a class must include a determination, based on a rigorous analysis of the evidence presented, that the requirements of this Act have been satisfied.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 3) The bill also amends federal bankruptcy law concerning a trust formed under a reorganization plan following the discharge in bankruptcy of a debtor corporation in order to assume the debtor's liability with respect to claims seeking recovery for personal injury, wrongful death, or property damage allegedly caused by the presence of, or exposure to, asbestos or asbestos-containing products. Such a trust shall file with the bankruptcy court quarterly reports, available on the public docket, which describe each demand the trust has received from a claimant and the basis for any payment made to that claimant (excluding any confidential medical record or the claimant's full Social Security number). Upon written request, and subject to payment (demanded at the option of the trust) for any reasonable cost incurred by the trust to comply with such request, such a trust shall provide any information related to payment from, and demands for payment from, the trust to any party to any action in law or equity concerning liability for asbestos exposure.
People & committees
Rep. Goodlatte, Bob [R-VA-6] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 211 - 188, 1 Present (Roll no. 33).
House roll call 33 · Individual votesMotion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 211 - 188, 1 Present (Roll no. 33).
House roll call 33 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by recorded vote: 173 - 227 (Roll no. 32).
House roll call 32 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H208)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the McCollum motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an amendment to ensure that the bill's asbestos trust provision would not apply to a claimant whose claim is filed by or on behalf of an individual exposed to asbestos as a child in a school environment.
Ms. McCollum moved to recommit with instructions to the Committee on the Judiciary. (consideration: CR H207-209; text of motion: CR H207)
The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H189-190)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H207)
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 1927.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - The Chair announced that the unfinished business was the question of adoption of amendments which had been debated earlier and on which further proceedings had been postponed.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Nadler amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Nadler demanded a recorded voted and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 581, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Nadler amendment No. 10.
The Committee of the Whole resumed its sitting.
RISING INFORMALLY - The Committee of the Whole rose informally to receive a message from the President.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Jackson Lee amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Jackson Lee demanded a recorded voted and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 581, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Jackson Lee amendment No. 9.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Johnson (GA) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Johnson (GA) demanded a recorded voted and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 581, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Johnson (GA) amendment No. 8.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Waters amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Waters demanded a recorded voted and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 581, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Waters, Maxine amendment No. 7.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Moore amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Moore demanded a recorded voted and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 581, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Moore amendment No. 6.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Moore amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Moore demanded a recorded voted and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 581, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Moore amendment No. 5.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Deutch amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Deutch demanded a recorded voted and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 581, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Deutch amendment No. 4.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Conyers amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Conyers demanded a recorded voted and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 581, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Conyers amendment No. 3.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 581, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Cohen amendment No. 2.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Cohen amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Cohen demanded a recorded voted and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H.Res. 581, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Cohen amendment No. 1.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 1927.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Rodney Davis to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 581 and Rule XVIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 1927 with 1 hour of general debate. Motion to recommit with or without instructions allowed. The resolution makes in order as original text for the purpose of amendment an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 114-38.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 581. (consideration: CR H181-200, H200-210)
Rule H. Res. 581 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 581 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 1927 with 1 hour of general debate. Motion to recommit with or without instructions allowed. The resolution makes in order as original text for the purpose of amendment an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 114-38.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 249.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 114-328.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 114-328.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 15 - 10.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice.
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.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. 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.1927 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.1927 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.1927 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.1927 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.