PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 11, 1998
Judicial Mandate and Remedy Clarification Act - Amends the Federal judicial code to prohibit any district court from entering any order or approving any settlement that: (1) requires a State or political subdivision to impose, increase, levy, or assess a tax; or (2) has the effect of imposing, increasing, levying, or assessing any tax. Permits a district court to issue an order or approve a settlement that requires a State or political subdivision to implement a spending measure for the purpose of enforcing any Federal or State common law or statutory or constitutional right or law only if the court finds that specified conditions exist, including that: (1) there are no other means available to remedy the violation; (2) the spending measure is narrowly tailored to remedy the violation; and (3) plans submitted by State and local authorities will not effectively redress the violation. Sets forth provisions regarding: (1) judicial review of the court's findings; (2) a right of certain aggrieved persons, corporations, or unincorporated associations to intervene in proceedings concerning implementation of a spending measure; and (3) termination of any such order or settlement after one year or earlier if the court determines that the violation of rights has been cured to the extent practicable.
People & committees
Rep. Manzullo, Donald A. [R-IL-16] · R–IL
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 Courts and Intellectual Property.
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: Aug 21, 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.3182 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.3182 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.3182 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.3182 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.