PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.By Senator Leahy from Committee on the Judiciary filed written report. Report No. 112-38.
Congressional Research Service
Version 80 · Reported to Senate without amendment · Mar 28, 2011
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Railroad Antitrust Enforcement Act of 2011 - Amends the Clayton Act to grant the United States exclusive authority to bring suit for injunctive relief against a common carrier that is not a rail common carrier subject to the jurisdiction of the Surface Transportation Board (STB).
Revises provisions prohibiting anticompetitive transactions except for those approved by specified federal agencies acting under certain statutes to eliminate the exemption for certain STB approved transactions.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Provides that, in any civil action against a rail common carrier, the U.S. district court shall not be required to defer to the primary jurisdiction of the STB.
Empowers the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to regulate, and engage in antitrust enforcement regarding, collective rate agreements and certain transactions, including railroad mergers and acquisitions.
Permits treble damages against railroad common carriers in antitrust suits to parties injured by antitrust violations without regard to whether such railroads have filed rates or whether a complaint challenging rates has been filed.
Amends federal transportation law to terminate the exemptions from antitrust laws for collective ratemaking agreements.
Requires the STB, when reviewing a proposed agreement, to take into account its impact upon shippers, consumers, and affected communities.
Revises STB authority to provide that a rail carrier, corporation, or a person participating in an approved transaction is not exempt from specified antitrust laws. Makes such provision inapplicable to any transaction relating to the pooling of railroad cars approved by the STB or its predecessor agency.
People & committees
Sen. Kohl, Herb [D-WI] · D–WI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
By Senator Leahy from Committee on the Judiciary filed written report. Report No. 112-38.
By Senator Leahy from Committee on the Judiciary filed written report. Report No. 112-38.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 19.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Leahy without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Leahy without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S162-163)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S161-162)
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.49 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.49 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.49 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.49 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.