PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Mar 12, 1998
Tucker Act Shuffle Relief Act of 1997 - Grants each of the U.S. district courts and the United States Court of Federal Claims (Claims Court) original jurisdiction to hear and determine all claims (whether for monetary or other relief) arising out of agency action alleged: (1) to constitute a taking in violation of the fifth amendment to the Constitution; or (2) not to constitute such a taking only because the action was not in accordance with lawful authority. Specifies that such grant of jurisdiction does not extend to matters over which other Federal law has granted exclusive jurisdiction to one or more U.S. courts of appeals. Provides that the plaintiff, by commencing such an action, elects which court shall hear and determine those claims as to that plaintiff. Prohibits any third party from being involuntarily joined to a case within the jurisdiction of the Claims Court by reason of this Act if that party would be entitled to a determination of the claim with respect to which that party is joined by a court established by or under article III of the Constitution. Grants the Claims Court the power to grant equitable and declaratory relief with respect to any claim within its jurisdiction under this Act. Directs that any appeal from an action commenced under this Act be to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Repeals a provision denying Claims Court jurisdiction over a claim for which a plaintiff has pending in another court a suit against the United States or a person acting therefor.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Lamar [R-TX-21] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 230 - 180 (Roll No. 52).
House roll call 52 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 230 - 180 (Roll No. 52).
House roll call 52 · Individual votesThe House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 992.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the unanimous consent agreement from the previous day, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 20 minutes of debate on the Watt (NC) amendment which was left pending when the Committee rose on Wednesday. The Watt amendment in the nature of a substitute seeks to grant to the United States district courts original jurisdiction to hear and determine all claims, notwithstanding the dollar amount, arising out of an agency action alleged to constitute a taking without just compensation.
The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1135-1140)
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 992 as unfinished business.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 382 and Rule XXIII.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Thomas W. Ewing to act as Chairman of the Committee.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 992 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the bill. Measure will be considered read. Bill is open to amendments.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 382. (consideration: CR H1087-1094)
Mr. Smith (TX) asked unanimous consent that during consideration of the bill in the Committee of the Whole, pursuant to H. Res. 382, after the legislative day of March 11 no further debate or amendments to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except as follows: On the legislative day of Thursday, March 12, the amendment by Representative Watt (NC), if offered on March 11, shall be further debatable for 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by Representative Watt (NC) and an opponent. Agreed to without objection.
Rule H. Res. 382 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 382 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 992 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the bill. Measure will be considered read. Bill is open to amendments.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 242.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 105-424.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 105-424.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 17 - 13.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration 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.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 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.992 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.992 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.992 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.992 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.