PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 29, 2010
Property Owners Access to Court Act of 2010 - Amends the federal judicial code to provide that, whenever a district court exercises jurisdiction in civil rights cases in which the operative facts concern the uses of real property, it shall not abstain from exercising such jurisdiction, or relinquish it to a state court, if the party seeking redress does not allege a violation of a state law, right, or privilege, and no parallel proceeding is pending in state court, at the time the action is filed in the district court, that arises out of the same operative facts as the district court proceeding.
Declares that in an action in which operative facts concern the uses of real property, the district court shall exercise jurisdiction even if the party seeking redress does not pursue judicial remedies provided by a state or territory. Provides for referral of an unsettled question of state law to the state's highest appellate court. Prohibits the district court from certifying a question of state law unless it is necessary to resolve the merits of the injured party's federal claim, and such question is patently unclear.
Declares that any claim or action to redress the deprivation of a property right or privilege secured by the Constitution shall be ripe for adjudication by the district courts upon a final decision rendered by any person acting under color of any law, regulation, custom, or usage of any state or U.S. territory that causes actual and concrete injury to the party seeking redress.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Declares that any claim founded upon a property right or privilege secured by the Constitution, but allegedly infringed or taken by the United States, shall be ripe for adjudication upon a final decision rendered by the United States which causes actual and concrete injury to the party seeking redress.
Amends the Revised Statutes of the United States and the federal judicial code with respect to certain constitutional property rights claims.
Provides for the liability of the United States for certain claims, brought under U.S. district court jurisdiction or Court of Federal Claims jurisdiction, where the claim is founded upon a property right or privilege secured by the Constitution.
Requires a federal agency, whenever it takes action limiting the use of private property that may be affected by the amendments made by this Act, to give notice to the owners of that property explaining their rights and the procedures for obtaining any compensation that may be due to them under such amendments.
People & committees
Rep. Lummis, Cynthia M. [R-WY-At Large] · R–WY
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 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.5624 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.5624 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.5624 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.5624 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.