PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.By Senator Specter from Committee on the Judiciary filed written report. Report No. 109-14. Additional and Minority views filed.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Feb 18, 2005
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The expanded summary of the Senate reported version is repeated here.)
Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 - (Sec. 3) Amends the Federal judicial code to specify the calculation of contingent and other attorney's fees in proposed class action settlements that provide for the award of coupons to class members. Prohibits a Federal district court from approving: (1) a proposed coupon settlement absent a finding that the settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate; (2) a proposed settlement involving payments to class counsel that would result in a net monetary loss to class members, absent a finding that the loss is substantially outweighed by nonmonetary benefits; or (3) a proposed settlement that provides greater sums to some class members solely because they are closer geographically to the court.
Specifies requirements for serving notices of proposed settlements on appropriate State and Federal officials. Prohibits issuance of an order giving final approval to a proposed settlement earlier than 90 days after such service. Allows class members to refuse compliance with settlement agreements or consent decrees absent notice.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 4) Grants district courts original jurisdiction of any civil action in which the matter in controversy exceeds $5 million, exclusive of interest and costs, and that is between citizens of different States, or citizens of a State and a foreign State or its citizens or subjects.
Lists those factors pursuant to which a district court may, in the interests of justice and based on the totality of the circumstances, decline to exercise jurisdiction over a class action in which more than one-third but less than two-thirds of the members of the proposed plaintiff classes in the aggregate and the primary defendants are citizens of the State in which the action was originally filed, based on consideration of whether: (1) the claims involve matters of national or interstate interest; (2) the claims will be governed by laws of the State where the action was originally filed or by the laws of other States; (3) the class action has been pleaded in a manner that seeks to avoid Federal jurisdiction; (4) the action was brought in a forum with a distinct nexus with the class members, the alleged harm, or the defendants; (5) the number of citizens of the State of original filing in all proposed plaintiff classes in the aggregate is substantially larger than the number of citizens from any other State and the citizenship of other proposed class members is dispersed; and (6) during the three-year period preceding filing, one or more other class actions asserting the same or similar claims on behalf of the same persons have been filed.
Specifies those circumstances in which a district court must decline jurisdiction, including those class actions in which: (1) more than two-thirds of the members of the proposed plaintiff classes in the aggregate are citizens of the State where the action was originally filed, at least one defendant is a defendant from whom significant relief is sought, whose alleged conduct forms a significant basis for the claims asserted, and who is a citizen of the State where the action was originally filed, and principal injuries resulting from the alleged or related conduct were incurred in such State; and (2) during the three-year period preceding filing, no other class action has been filed asserting the same or similar factual allegations against any of the defendants on behalf of the same or other persons; or (3) two-thirds or more of the members of all proposed plaintiff classes in the aggregate, and the primary defendants, are citizens of the State where the action was originally filed.
Makes provisions of this Act concerning the application of Federal diversity jurisdiction applicable to any class action before or after entry of a class certification order.
(Sec. 5) Sets forth provisions governing the removal of interstate class actions to Federal district court and the review on appeal of remand orders.
(Sec. 6) Directs the Judicial Conference of the United States to report on class action settlements, incorporating recommendations for best court practices to ensure fairness for class members and appropriate fees for counsel.
(Sec. 7) States that amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 (governing class actions) set forth in the Supreme Court order entered on March 27, 2003, shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act or on December 1, 2003, whichever occurs first.
(Sec. 8) Retains the authority of the Supreme Court and Judicial Conference to propose and prescribe general rules of practice and procedure.
People & committees
Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA] · R–IA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
By Senator Specter from Committee on the Judiciary filed written report. Report No. 109-14. Additional and Minority views filed.
By Senator Specter from Committee on the Judiciary filed written report. Report No. 109-14. Additional and Minority views filed.
Became Public Law No: 109-2.
Became Public Law No: 109-2.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Cleared for White House.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 279 - 149 (Roll no. 38). (text: CR H723-726)
House roll call 38 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 279 - 149 (Roll no. 38).(text: CR H723-726)
House roll call 38 · Individual votesOn motion to commit with instructions Failed by recorded vote: 175 - 249 (Roll no. 37). (consideration: CR H752-754)
House roll call 37 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to commit with instructions was ordered without objection.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Brown (OH) motion to commit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House forthwith with amendments which provide that the term "class action" does not include any action arising by reason of the use of the drug Vioxx.
Mr. Brown (OH) moved to commit with instructions to Judiciary.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 96, the House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on the Conyers amendment in the nature of a substitute. (text: CR H743-746)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour and thirty minutes of debate on S. 5.
Rule provides for consideration of S. 5 with 1 hour and 30 minutes of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions. Measure will be considered read. A specified amendment is in order.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 96. (consideration: CR H723-755)
Rule H. Res. 96 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 96 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of S. 5 with 1 hour and 30 minutes of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions. Measure will be considered read. A specified amendment is in order.
Held at the desk.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 72 - 26. Record Vote Number: 9. (text: CR S1249-1252)
Senate roll call 9 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 72 - 26. Record Vote Number: 9.(text: CR S1249-1252)
Senate roll call 9 · Individual votesConsidered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1225-1252)
Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1150-1152, S1157-1189)
Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1076-1086, S1086-1110)
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S999-1009)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 1.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Specter without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Specter 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.
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.5 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.5 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.5 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.5 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.