PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Aug 3, 2007
Pigford Claims Remedy Act of 2007 - Declares that any Pigford claimant (relating to a racial discrimination action against the Department of Agriculture) who has not previously obtained a determination on the merits of a Pigford claim may, in a civil action, obtain that determination.
Asserts that it is Congress's intent that this Act be liberally construed so as to effectuate its remedial purpose of giving a full determination on the merits for each denied Pigford claim.
Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to provide a claimant with a report on farm credit loans made within the claimant's county or adjacent county during a specified period which shall contain information on all accepted applicants (but without any personally identifiable information), including: (1) the applicant's race; (2) the application and loan decision dates; and (3) the location of the office making the loan decision.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Sets forth provisions respecting: (1) expedited claim resolution; and (2) foreclosure limitation.
Defines: (1) "Pigford claimant" as an individual who previously submitted a late-filing request under the consent decree in the case of Pigford v. Glickman (1999); and (2) "Pigford claim" as a discrimination complaint as defined and documented by such consent decree.
People & committees
Sen. Obama, Barack [D-IL] · D–IL
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.
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.1989 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.1989 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.1989 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.1989 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.