PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S5736)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 31, 2012
Criminal Antitrust Anti-Retaliation Act - Prohibits discharging or in any other manner discriminating against a whistleblower in terms and conditions of employment because: (1) the whistleblower provided information to the employer or the federal government concerning a violation of antitrust law or another criminal law committed in conjunction with a potential violation of antitrust law; or (2) the whistleblower participated in, or otherwise assisted, an investigation relating to such a violation.
Allows a whistleblower who alleges discharge or other discrimination to seek relief: (1) by filing a complaint with the Secretary of Labor; or (2) if the Secretary has not issued a final decision within 180 days of filing such complaint, to bring an action at law or equity.
Entitles a whistleblower who prevails in any such action to all relief necessary to make such whistleblower whole.
People & committees
Sen. Leahy, Patrick J. [D-VT] · D–VT
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. (text of measure as introduced: CR S5736)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S5736)
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.3462 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.3462 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.3462 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.3462 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.