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 3, 2002
Multiparty, Multiforum Trial Jurisdiction Act of 2002 - Amends the Federal judicial code to grant Federal district courts original jurisdiction over any civil action involving minimal diversity of citizenship between adverse parties that arises from a single accident, where at least 75 natural persons have died in the accident at a discrete location, if: (1) a defendant resides in a State and a substantial part of the accident took place in another State or other location; (2) any two defendants reside in different States; or (3) substantial parts of the accident took place in different States. Directs the district court to abstain from hearing any such action in which: (1) the substantial majority of all plaintiffs are citizens of a single State of which the primary defendants are also citizens; and (2) the claims asserted will be governed primarily by the laws of that State.Authorizes venue for such action in any district in which a defendant resides or in which a substantial part of the accident occurred. Permits a district court to retain such actions for the determination of liability and damages.Permits removal of actions which could have been brought in district court under the above provisions from State to U.S. district courts. Establishes a presumption in favor of discretionary remand to State courts for damages determinations after rulings on liability.Authorizes nationwide service of process and, upon a showing of good cause, nationwide service of subpoenas with regard to actions under this Act.
People & committees
Sen. Hatch, Orrin G. [R-UT] · R–UT
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.3050 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.3050 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.3050 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.3050 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.