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 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Jun 14, 2005
Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act of 2005 - (Sec. 2) Amends Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Signing of Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to Court; Sanctions) to: (1) require courts to impose sanctions on attorneys, law firms, or parties who file frivolous lawsuits (currently discretionary); (2) disallow the withdrawal or correction of pleadings to avoid Rule 11 sanctions; (3) require courts to award parties prevailing on Rule 11 motions reasonable expenses and attorney's fees, if warranted; and (4) authorize courts to impose Rule 11 sanctions that include reimbursement of a party's reasonable litigation costs in connection with frivolous lawsuits.
(Sec. 3) Makes Rule 11 applicable to state civil actions where the state court determines, upon motion, that an action substantially affects interstate commerce.
(Sec. 4) Requires personal injury claims (defined to exclude class actions) filed in state or federal court to be filed in the county or federal district in which: (1) the person bringing the claim resides at the time of filing or resided at the time of the alleged injury; (2) the alleged injury or circumstances giving rise to the claim occurred; (3) the defendant's principal place of business is located; or (4) the defendant resides, if the defendant is an individual. Directs the trial court to determine which county or federal district is the most appropriate forum in those situations where the alleged injury occurred in more than one county or district.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 6) Requires a federal district court to suspend from the practice of law for one year (or for an additional period at the court's discretion) an attorney who is found to have violated Rule 11 three or more times. Grants such attorney a right to appeal a suspension and permits reinstatement after suspension under procedures and conditions prescribed by the court.
(Sec. 7) Establishes a rebuttable presumption that an attempt to litigate, in any forum, an issue that has been previously litigated and lost on three consecutive prior occasions is a Rule 11 violation.
(Sec. 8) Imposes additional sanctions for the intentional destruction of documents sought in, and highly relevant to, a court proceeding.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Lamar [R-TX-21] · R–TX
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: 228 - 184 (Roll no. 553).
House roll call 553 · Individual votesMotion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 228 - 184 (Roll no. 553).
House roll call 553 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by recorded vote: 196 - 217 (Roll no. 552). (consideration: CR H9327-9329; text: CR H9327)
House roll call 552 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection.
Floor summary: DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Barrow motion to recommit.
Mr. Barrow moved to recommit with instructions to Judiciary.
The House adopted the amendment as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. (text: CR H9319)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H9327)
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 420.
DEBATE - Pursuant to H. Res. 508, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 40 minutes of debate on the Schiff amendment in the nature of a substitute.
DEBATE - Pursuant to H. Res. 508, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Smith (TX) amendment.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 420.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Tom Latham 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. 508 and Rule XVIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 420 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 508. (consideration: CR H9312-9329)
Rule H. Res. 508 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 508 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 420 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 69.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 109-123.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 109-123.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 19 - 11.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H633-634)
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.420 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.420 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.420 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.420 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.