PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 2, 2011
Holocaust Insurance Accountability Act of 2011 - Authorizes any person who purchased a covered policy, or a beneficiary or heir of such person, to bring a civil action in federal district court against the insurer, or a related company of the insurer, to recover proceeds due or enforce any rights under the policy. (Defines "covered policy" as any life, dowry, education, property, or other insurance policy that: (1) was in effect at any time between January 30, 1933, and December 31, 1945; and (2) was issued to a policyholder domiciled in any area occupied or controlled by Nazi Germany).
Permits nationwide service of process in order to bring such civil action.
Directs the court to award certain remedies to the prevailing beneficiary in such action.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits any executive agreement between the United States and any foreign country from invalidating or preempting 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 by reason of either any specified executive foreign policy or specified executive agreement.
Deems effective upon its enactment any state law enacted on or after March 1, 1998, which requires an insurer doing business in that state to disclose information regarding such covered policies.
Prohibits any federal department or agency from expending funds for the purpose of issuing a statement of interest seeking to encourage a federal court to dismiss any claim or action brought to recover compensation arising out of or related to a covered policy.
Prohibits a court from dismissing a claim or action brought under this Act within 10 years after its enactment on the ground that the claim or action is barred under any statute of limitations or the doctrine of laches.
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.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law.
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 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.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.890 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.890 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.890 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.890 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.