PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 8, 2005
Fairness in Bankruptcy Litigation Act of 2005 - Amends the Federal judicial code to establish that domicile and residence of a debtor, for purposes of establishing venue in bankruptcy cases on the basis of domicile and residence, is located where the debtor's principal place of business is located. Provides that venue also lies in the district in which such a case concerning the controlling corporation is pending: (1) if the debtor is controlled by another corporation, the financial statements of the debtor have been consolidated with those of the controlling corporation within a specified period of time before filing for bankruptcy, and the controlling corporation is a debtor in bankruptcy proceedings; or (2) if the debtor is not such a corporation, the debtor has been controlled by another corporation for a specified time period before filing, and the controlling corporation is a debtor in bankruptcy proceedings.
Adds bankruptcy courts to the list of district courts required to dismiss or transfer cases laying venue in the wrong division or district.
People & committees
Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX] · R–TX
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.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1125-1129)
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.314 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.314 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.314 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.314 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.