PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 21, 2003
National Class Action Act of 2003 - Amends the Federal judicial code to require: (1) the portion of any attorney's fee paid to class counsel based on a recovery of coupons in a class action settlement to be based on the value to class members of the coupons redeemed; and (2) the attorney's fee in such a settlement otherwise to be based upon the amount of time class counsel expended working on the action, subject to court approval.
Grants a U.S. district court jurisdiction over a class action in which one-third or fewer of the members of all proposed plaintiff classes in the aggregate are citizens of the State in which the action was originally filed. Lists grounds under which a U.S. 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 the plaintiff class are citizens of the State in which the action was originally filed. Bars a U.S. district court from exercising jurisdiction over a class action (with exceptions) in which: (1) two-thirds or more of the members of all proposed plaintiff classes are citizens of the State in which the action was originally filed; (2) the primary defendants are States, State officials, or other governmental entities against whom the district court may be foreclosed from ordering relief; or (3) the number of members of all proposed plaintiff classes in the aggregate is less than 100.
Allows a class action over which a district court would have jurisdiction under this Act to be removed to a U.S. district court by any: (1) defendant without the consent of all defendants; or (2) plaintiff class member who has intervened, seeks to be designated as a representative class member, and is not a named or representative class member without the consent of all members of such class.
People & committees
Sen. Breaux, John B. [D-LA] · D–LA
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 the Judiciary.
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.1769 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.1769 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.1769 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.1769 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.