PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee Hearings Held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 14, 2007
Minnesota Chippewa Tribe Judgment Fund Distribution Act of 2007 - Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to reimburse to each of the Boise Forte Band, Fond du Lac Band, Grand Portage Band, Leech Lake Band, Mille Lacs Band, and White Earth Band the amount of funds plus interest earned to the date of reimbursement that each Band contributed for payment of litigation expenses and expert witness fees associated with the litigation of Docket No. 19 and Docket No. 188 before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.
Provides for reimbursement to a Band only for litigation expenses and expert witness fees incurred prior to June 22, 1999.
Requires that a Band's claim for reimbursement of expended funds be certified by the Band as being unreimbursed to it from other funding sources.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Secretary to review the claims and determine if the fees and expenses are properly documented and incurred in the litigation of the claims before the Court in Docket Nos. 19 and 188.
Requires the Bands to update their membership rolls to include all living enrolled members. Subjects the membership rolls to the review and approval of the Secretary.
Sets forth provisions for the: (1) division of the judgment funds; and (2) development of separate tribal plans for the use and distribution of such funds.
People & committees
Rep. Peterson, Collin C. [D-MN-7] · D–MN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee Hearings Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
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: Aug 14, 2025. 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.2306 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.2306 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.2306 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.2306 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.