PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 7, 2006
Fairness in Immigration Litigation Act of 2006 - Prohibits any court from certifying an action as a class action under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in any civil immigration action.
Sets forth the requirements under which a court may order prospective relief in such an action. Provides that preliminary injunctive relief shall expire 90 days after entry unless otherwise determined by the court.
Requires a court to promptly rule on any government motion to vacate, modify, dissolve, or otherwise terminate an order granting prospective relief in a civil immigration action. Provides for an automatic 15-day stay of the prospective relief order. Authorizes a court to enter an order to postpone for up to 15 days the effective date of an automatic stay.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Provides that: (1) whenever a higher court remands a decision on a motion to a lower court the order granting prospective relief that is the subject of the motion shall be automatically stayed until the district court grants or denies such motion; and (2) any order staying, suspending, delaying, or otherwise barring the effective date of an automatic stay, other than an order to postpone the effective date, shall be treated as an order refusing to vacate, modify, dissolve, or otherwise terminate an injunction and shall be appealable.
States that: (1) no court has jurisdiction to grant or continue an order affecting an expedited removal action against an alien; (2) upon the government's filing of a motion to vacate, modify, dissolve, or otherwise terminate an order granting prospective relief in a civil immigration action, the court involved shall determine whether it continues to have jurisdiction and shall vacate any order or part of a relief order that is not within its jurisdiction; and (3) sections (1) and (2) of this paragraph shall not apply to a relief order that was entered before the date of the enactment of this Act to remedy a violation of constitutional rights.
Sets forth consent decree and private settlement agreement provisions.
People & committees
Rep. Bonilla, Henry [R-TX-23] · R–TX
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: Aug 15, 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.5541 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.5541 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.5541 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.5541 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.