PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 10, 2016
Clarifying Amendment to Provide Terrorism Victims Equity Act or the CAPTIVE Act
This bill amends the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 regarding the blocked assets of a terrorist party which shall be subject to execution or attachment in aid of execution in order to satisfy a judgment based upon an act of terrorism in an action brought by or on behalf of the person obtaining the judgment.
The bill redefines "blocked asset" to include any asset seized or frozen by the United States under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act.
The bill also defines a "person" who has obtained such a judgment as a natural person who, at the time the act of terrorism was committed upon which the judgment was obtained, was:
a national of the United States;
a member of the U.S. Armed Forces; or
otherwise an employee of the federal government, or of a federal government contractor, acting within the scope of employment.
If the person described is deceased, the personal representative of the estate of that deceased person shall count as the person.
People & committees
Sen. Nelson, Bill [D-FL] · D–FL
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 Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.2909 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.2909 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.2909 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.2909 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.