PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to Subcommittee on Oversight and Courts.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 30, 1998
Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998 - Replaces Federal judicial code arbitration provisions with alternative dispute resolution (ADR) provisions. Directs each United States district court to: (1) authorize the use of ADR processes in all civil actions, with specified limitations on the use of arbitration; (2) devise and implement its own ADR program to encourage and promote the use of ADR in its district; (3) examine the effectiveness of existing ADR programs and adopt appropriate improvements; and (4) designate an employee or judicial officer who is knowledgeable in ADR practices and processes to implement, administer, oversee, and evaluate the court's ADR program. Authorizes the Federal Judicial Center and the Administrative Office of the United States Courts to assist the district courts in the establishment and improvement of ADR programs. (Sec. 4) Directs each district court to require that litigants in all civil cases consider the use of an ADR process at an appropriate stage in the litigation and provide litigants in all civil cases with at least one ADR process. Allows any district court that elects to require the use of ADR in certain cases to do so only with respect to mediation, early neutral evaluation, and, if the parties consent, arbitration. Sets forth provisions regarding actions exempted from consideration of ADR, authority of the Attorney General, and confidentiality. (Sec. 5) Requires each district court that authorizes the use of ADR processes to adopt appropriate processes for making neutrals available for use by the parties for each category of process offered. Sets forth provisions regarding neutral selection, qualifications, and training. (Sec. 6) Authorizes a district court to allow the referral to arbitration of any civil action pending before it when the parties consent, except where: (1) the action is based on an alleged violation of a right secured by the Constitution; (2) jurisdiction is based on Federal civil rights and elective franchise provisions; or (3) the relief sought consists of money damages exceeding $150,000. Directs the district court to establish interim procedures to ensure that consent to arbitration is freely and knowingly obtained and that no party or attorney is prejudiced for refusing to participate in arbitration. (Sec. 7) Entitles arbitrators in an ADR program to the immunities and protections that the law accords to persons serving in a quasi-judicial capacity. (Sec. 8) Makes Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (relating to subpoenas) applicable to subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses and the production of documentary evidence at an arbitration hearing. (Sec. 9) Sets forth provisions regarding filing procedures and the effect of an arbitration award and judgment, the sealing of such award, and trial de novo of arbitration awards. (Sec. 10) Directs the district court to establish and pay any amount of compensation that each neutral shall receive for services rendered, subject to specified limitations. (Sec. 11) Authorizes appropriations.
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.
Referred to Subcommittee on Oversight and Courts.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S9433)
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.2373 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.2373 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.2373 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.2373 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.