PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Oct 1, 2015
Justice for Victims of Iranian Terrorism Act
(Sec. 2) This bill prohibits the President, until Iran has paid each judgment against it, from:
limiting the application of specified sanctions on Iran or refraining from applying them; or
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
removing a foreign person (including entities) listed in Attachments 3 or 4 to Annex II of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPA) from the list of designated nationals and blocked persons maintained by the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the Department of the Treasury.
These sanctions are the ones contained in:
sections 4 through 7.9 of Annex II of the JCPA; and
any other agreement related to Iran's nuclear program that includes the United States, commits the United States to take action, or pursuant to which the United States commits or otherwise agrees to take action, regardless of the form it takes, whether a political commitment or otherwise, and regardless of whether the agreement is legally binding or not.
A judgment is any final judgment entered by the courts of the United States or of the states that:
relates to a claim brought against Iran or its political subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities and for which the court determined that none of them were immune under specified terrorism exceptions from the court's jurisdiction; and
was entered between April 24, 1996, and the date of the enactment of this Act.
The JCPA is the agreement signed at Vienna on July 14, 2015, by Iran, China, France, Germany, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, and the United States, with the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, and all related implementing materials and agreements.
People & committees
Rep. Meehan, Patrick [R-PA-7] · R–PA
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 Foreign Relations.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 251 - 173 (Roll no. 533). (text: CR H6761)
House roll call 533 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 251 - 173 (Roll no. 533).(text: CR H6761)
House roll call 533 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H6778-6779)
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.R. 3457, the Chair put the question on passage and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Royce demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings on passage until later in the legislative day.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H6768)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 3457.
The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 3457, consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 1735 and for motions to suspend the rules.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 449. (consideration: CR H6761-6768)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H6143)
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
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.3457 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.3457 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.3457 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.3457 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.