PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 10, 2025
Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act of 2025
This bill strengthens the sanctions provisions under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Rule 11 establishes standards for pleadings, written motions, and other papers that are presented to a district court and establishes sanctions for an attorney, law firm, or party who does not comply with the standards. Under the Rule 11 standards, a pleading, written motion, or other paper must not be presented for an improper purpose and must make contentions that are reasonably supported by fact and law.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Currently, the purpose of sanctions is to deter future violations of the Rule 11 standards. Rule 11 authorizes judges to impose sanctions on an attorney, law firm, or party who fails to comply with the standards; allows awards of compensation to an injured party only when necessary for effective deterrence; and requires a motion for sanctions to be served on a party 21 days before it is filed in court, creating a 21-day "safe harbor" within which a party may withdraw or correct a filing that allegedly violates Rule 11 standards.
This bill amends Rule 11 to expressly state that the purpose of sanctions is to compensate the injured party as well as to deter future violations. The bill mandates sanctions for violations of the Rule 11 standards; requires sanctions to include compensation for the injured party for reasonable expenses incurred as a result of the violation, including attorneys' fees; and eliminates the 21-day safe harbor.
People & committees
Rep. Collins, Mike [R-GA-10] · R–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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: Sep 19, 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.5258 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.5258 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.5258 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.5258 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.