PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 7, 1995
Voluntary Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1995 - Amends the Federal judicial code to authorize each U.S. district court to: (1) encourage litigants in appropriate cases to use voluntary alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedures, whether offered in the private sector or sponsored by the court; and (2) establish such voluntary ADR programs as the court determines appropriate. Provides that the ADR procedures may include mediation, early neutral evaluation, minitrials, summary jury or bench trials, and non-binding judicial arbitration. Authorizes a Federal court to establish appropriate voluntary ADR procedures and encourage voluntary use of ADR services offered in the private sector. Specifies that: (1) an ADR program under this Act shall not infringe on a litigant's right to trial de novo and shall impose no penalty on participating litigants; and (2) nothing in this Act is intended to interfere with any ADR program authorized under any other provision of law, including court annexed non-binding arbitration.
People & committees
Sen. Heflin, Howell [D-AL] · D–AL
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 Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3613-3614)
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.513 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.513 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.513 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.513 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.