PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Cloture on the motion to proceed to the measure not invoked in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 59 - 39. Record Vote Number: 403.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 17, 2003
Class Action Fairness Act of 2003 - Amends the Federal judicial code to prohibit a Federal district court from approving a proposed class action settlement under which: (1) members would receive non-cash benefits or would be required to expend funds in order to obtain proposed benefits, unless the court finds, after a hearing, that the settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate; (2) any member is obligated to pay sums to class counsel that would result in a net loss to the member, unless the court finds that non-monetary benefits to the member outweigh the monetary loss; (3) greater sums would be paid to some class members than to others solely on the basis of their closer geographic proximity to the court; or (4) a greater share would be paid to a class representative than to other class members. Sets forth requirements for: (1) notices of class actions to class members, including a requirement that such notice include a summary written in plain, easily understood language of class member legal consequences, rights, and benefits, obligations of defendants, and attorney fees; and (2) notices of proposed settlements to be served upon appropriate State and Federal regulatory officials.
Grants Federal district courts original jurisdiction of any civil action in which the matter in controversy exceeds $5 million, exclusive of interest and costs, and in which any member of a class of plaintiffs is: (1) a citizen of a State different from any defendant; (2) a foreign state or a citizen or subject of a foreign state and any defendant is a citizen of a State; or (3) a citizen of a State and any defendant is a foreign state or a citizen or subject of a foreign state.
Sets forth considerations based upon which a district court may decline to exercise jurisdiction over a class action in which greater than one-third but less than two-thirds of the members of all proposed plaintiff classes in the aggregate and the primary defendants are citizens of the State in which the action was originally filed, including consideration of whether: (1) the claims asserted involve matters of national or interstate interest; and (2) the class action has been pleaded in a manner that seeks to avoid Federal jurisdiction.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Provides that district courts shall not be granted jurisdiction over any class action: (1) in which two-thirds or more of the members of all proposed plaintiff classes and the primary defendants are citizens of the State in which the action was originally filed; (2) in which the primary defendants are States; (3) in which the number of members of all proposed plaintiff classes is less than 100; or (4) involving certain securities claims or claims involving the internal governance of a corporation that arise under the laws of the State of incorporation.
Sets forth provisions governing: (1) the removal of interstate class actions to U.S. district court; and (2) review by appeal of orders remanding class actions to State courts.
Directs the Judicial Conference of the United States to report on class action settlements, including recommendations for best court practices to ensure that settlements are fair to class members.
People & committees
Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA] · R–IA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Cloture on the motion to proceed to the measure not invoked in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 59 - 39. Record Vote Number: 403.
Senate roll call 403 · Individual votesMotion to proceed to measure considered in Senate.
Motion to proceed to measure considered in Senate.
Cloture motion presented in Senate.
Motion to proceed to measure considered in Senate.
Motion to proceed to measure considered in Senate.
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 315.
Introduced in the Senate. Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 18, 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 S.1751 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.1751 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.1751 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.1751 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.