PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 4, 2010
Holocaust Insurance Accountability Act of 2010 - Declares that no executive agreement between the United States and any foreign country shall invalidate or preempt any state law creating a cause of action against an insurer or related company based upon a claim arising out of or related to a covered insurance policy that: (1) was in effect at any time after January 30, 1933, and before December 31, 1945; and (2) was issued to a policyholder domiciled in any area occupied or controlled by Nazi Germany.
Deems any state law enacted as of March 1, 1998, which requires an insurer doing business in that state to disclose information regarding such a covered policy to be effective upon its enactment.
Authorizes the President to waive application of this Act upon: (1) a determination that the executive agreement is vital to U.S. national security interests; and (2) presentation of a report by the President to certain congressional committees explaining the reasons for such determination.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits a court from dismissing a claim that is brought under a state law within 10 years after enactment of this Act on the ground that the claim is barred under any statute of limitations.
Declares this Act applicable to any claim brought under state law before, on, or after enactment of this Act including: (1) any claim dismissed on the ground of executive preemption before the date of the enactment of this Act; and (2) any claim that is deemed released as a result of the settlement of a class action entered into before enactment of this Act if the claimant did not receive any payment pursuant to the settlement.
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.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts and Competition Policy.
Referred to House Judiciary
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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 House Foreign Affairs
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.4596 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.4596 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.4596 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.4596 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.