PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 20, 2004
Amends the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA) to require that a foreign state designated as a state sponsor of terrorism under specified laws, or an official, employee, or agent of such a foreign state, shall be liable to a U.S. national for the national's personal injury or death caused by acts of that state or official, employee, or agent acting within the scope of his or her duties.
Authorizes U.S. courts to exercise jurisdiction over such actions for money damages under a FSIA provision concerning acts of torture, extrajudicial killing, aircraft sabotage, hostage taking, and material support for such acts. Mandates that property interests of foreign states, or agencies or instrumentalities of foreign states, against which judgment is entered pursuant to such provision are subject to attachment execution.
Requires foreign states to be held vicariously liable for the actions of their officials, employees, or agents.
Revives previously dismissed causes of action that would be cognizable under this Act by retroactively tolling the applicable statute of limitations from the date of initial filing to 60 days after enactment of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Saxton, Jim [R-NJ-3] · R–NJ
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, Border Security, and Claims.
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: Jan 2, 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.4875 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.4875 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.4875 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.4875 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.