PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 3, 2007
Authorizes the President to compensate a U.S. national, or his or her estate, who: (1) has a claim pending in U.S. court against a foreign state seeking compensation for injuries caused by an act of hostage-taking, or has obtained a judgment on such a claim that has not been fully satisfied; (2) on or after August 2, 1990, and while not serving on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces, was taken hostage by a terrorist party; or (3) was a representative plaintiff or class member in Case Number 1:00CV03110 (EGS) or a plaintiff in Case Number 1:00CV00716 (HHK) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
Limits an award to $500,000, adjusted to reflect the annual change in the Consumer Price Index.
Bars a person who has accepted compensation under this Act from commencing or maintaining a U.S. civil action seeking compensation for such injuries or damages associated with such hostage taking against a foreign state or its agencies or instrumentalities.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Funds compensation under this Act from the Hostage Victims Fund (as provided by this Act) into which the President shall direct deposits from: (1) blocked assets of terrorist parties; (2) amounts received against any person in connection with the U.N. Oil for Food Program; or (3) amounts received as a result of any fine or forfeiture in connection with a violation of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the Trading With the Enemy Act, the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, the Bank Secrecy Act, or the Export Administration Act.
Provides additional compensation for victims of the 1979 Iranian hostage taking in Tehran, including spouses and children of persons taken captive.
Authorizes the return of a country's funds deposited into the Hostage Victims Fund upon termination of the country's terrorist party designation.
People & committees
Rep. Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana [R-FL-18] · R–FL
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, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.3369 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.3369 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.3369 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.3369 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.