Securities Litigation Attorney Accountability and Transparency Act
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S2334-2335)
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 22, 2013
Securities Litigation Attorney Accountability and Transparency Act - Amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Securities Act of 1933 to require plaintiff and plaintiff's attorney in any private securities class action to disclose in sworn certifications filed with the complaint: (1) any direct or indirect payment, or promise of such, by the attorney (or an affiliated person) to the plaintiff (or any affiliated person), beyond the pro rata share of any recovery received by the plaintiff; (2) the nature and terms of any legal representation provided by such attorney (or an affiliated person) to such plaintiff (or an affiliated person), other than the representation of the plaintiff in the private action; and (3) any contribution made during the five-year period preceding the filing date of the complaint by such attorney (or an affiliated person) or any political action committee controlled by such attorney, to any elected official with real or apparent authority to retain counsel for such plaintiff or to select or appoint, influence the selection or appointment of, or oversee any individual or group of individuals with that authority.
Requires the court, in exercising its discretion over the approval of lead counsel, to employ a competitive bidding process as one of the criteria in the selection and retention of counsel for the most adequate plaintiff in a class action, unless the court determines on the record that such a process is not feasible.
Directs the Comptroller General to: (1) study fee awards to lead counsel in securities class actions during the seven-year period preceding the enactment of this Act; and (2) determine the effective average hourly rate for lead counsel in such actions, including lead counsel perquisites such as travel and accommodation.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.652 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.652 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.652 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.652 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.