PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to Subcommittee on Antitrust, Monopolies and Business.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 4, 1993
Amends the Clayton Act to include a specified antidumping provision among U.S. antitrust laws. Amends such antidumping provision of the Unfair Competition Act of 1916 to allow any person who is injured in his or her property or business by the sale or importation of an article made in a foreign country to bring a civil action against the manufacturer, exporter, or related importer of such article if: (1) the article is imported or sold in the United States at less than its foreign market or constructed value; or (2) the foreign country or person or organization of such country is providing (directly or indirectly) a subsidy with respect to the manufacture, production, or exportation of such article; and (3) the sale or importation causes or threatens material injury to U.S. industry or labor or prevents the establishment or modernization of U.S. industry. Restricts the court jurisdiction of such an action to the District Court of the District of Columbia or the Court of International Trade. Entitles a prevailing party to appropriate equitable relief, or if such relief is inadequate, to compensatory damages and legal expenses. Sets a four-year statute of limitations for actions under this Act. Permits the United States to intervene in an action under this Act as a matter of right. Subjects any court order under this Act to nullification by the President. Allows any person who is injured in his or her business or property by the fraudulent, grossly negligent, or negligent entry or introduction of merchandise into U.S. commerce to bring a civil action in the District Court of the District of Columbia or the Court of International Trade, without respect to the amount in controversy. Entitles a prevailing party to appropriate equitable relief or, if such relief is inadequate, compensatory damages and legal expenses. Permits the United States to intervene in such an action as a matter of right. Subjects any court order to nullification by the President. Expresses the sense of the Congress that this Act is consistent with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.
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.
Referred to Subcommittee on Antitrust, Monopolies and Business.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1424-1426)
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.332 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.332 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.332 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.332 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.