PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 26, 2008
Attorney-Client Privilege Protection Act of 2008 - Amends the federal criminal code to prohibit any U.S. agent or attorney, in any federal investigation or criminal or civil enforcement matter, including any form of administrative proceeding or adjudication, from: (1) demanding or requesting that an organization, or a current or former employee or agent of such organization, waive the protections of the attorney-client privilege or attorney work product doctrine; (2) offering to reward or actually rewarding an organization, or current or former employee or agent, for waiving such protections; or (3) threatening adverse treatment or penalizing an organization, or current or former employee or agent, for declining to waive those protections.
Prohibits a U.S. agent or attorney in any federal investigation or criminal or civil enforcement matter, including any form of administrative proceeding or adjudication, from considering specified conduct in: (1) making a civil or criminal charging or enforcement decision relating to an organization, or one of its current or former employees or agents; or (2) determining whether an organization, or a current or former employee or agent, is cooperating with the government.
Numbers among the actions a U.S. agent or attorney may not use as a charging decision condition or a cooperation-determining factor: (1) any valid assertion of the protection of the attorney-client privilege or attorney work product doctrine; (2) the provision of counsel to, or contribution to the legal defense fees or expenses of, a current or former employee or agent of an organization; (3) entry into, or existence of, a valid joint-defense, information-sharing, or common-interest agreement between an organization and a current or former employee or agent, or among its current or former employees; (4) the sharing of relevant information in anticipation of or in response to an investigation or enforcement matter between an organization and a current or former employee or agent, or among its current or former employees, unless shuch sharing is itself an offense; or (5) the failure to terminate the employment or affiliation of or otherwise sanction any employee or agent of the organization because of the employee's or agent's decision to exercise personal constitutional rights or other legal protections in response to a government request.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits a U.S. agent or attorney from demanding or requesting that an organization or an affiliated person not take any such action.
People & committees
Sen. Specter, Arlen [R-PA] · R–PA
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 S6294-6295)
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.3217 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.3217 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.3217 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.3217 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.