PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Dec 22, 1995
Protecting Class Action Plaintiffs Act of 1995 - Amends the Federal judicial code to require the attorneys representing the class in a class action lawsuit, no later than ten days after a proposed settlement is filed, to serve the attorney general of each State in which a class member resides and the Department of Justice (DOJ) with specified information, including a copy of the complaint, notice of any scheduled judicial hearing in the class action, and any proposed or final class action settlement. Specifies that: (1) a hearing to consider final approval of a proposed settlement may not be held earlier than 120 days after such notice is served; (2) a class member may refuse to comply with, and may choose not to be bound by, a settlement agreement or consent decree in such a lawsuit if the class member resides in a State whose attorney general has not been provided such notice; and (3) any court order certifying a class or approving a proposed settlement in a class action and any written opinions concerning such court orders and decrees shall be made available for publication in official court reporters and electronic legal databases. Directs any court with jurisdiction over a class action in which the plaintiff is a class to require that: (1) any written notice provided to the class through the mail or publication in printed media contain a short summary written in plain, easily understood language describing the subject matter of the class action, the legal consequences of joining such action, and specified other information; and (2) any notice provided through television or radio to inform the class of its rights to be excluded from a class action or a proposed settlement indicate and explain in plain, easily understood language the individuals that may potentially become class members and that the failure of individuals to exercise their right to be excluded will result in the individual's inclusion in the class action.
People & committees
Sen. Cohen, William S. [R-ME] · R–ME
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S19250-19252)
Introduced in Senate
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 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 S.1501 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 S.1501 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 S.1501 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 S.1501 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.