PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance. (text of measure as introduced: CR S4173-4174)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 20, 2003
World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Review Commission Act - Establishes the World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Review Commission to review: (1) all reports of dispute settlement panels or the Appellate Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in proceedings initiated by other parties to the WTO that are adverse to the United States and that are adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body; and (2) upon the request of U.S. Trade Representative or specified congressional officials, any other report of a dispute settlement panel, or the Appellate Body that is adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body.
Requires the Commission, with respect to such reports that are adverse to the United States and adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body, to conduct a review and determine whether the panel or Appellate Body: (1) exceeded its authority or its terms of reference; (2) added to the obligations, or diminished U.S. rights under the Uruguay Round Agreement that is the subject of the report; (3) acted arbitrarily or capriciously, engaged in misconduct, or demonstrably departed from the procedures specified for panels and Appellate Bodies in the applicable Uruguay Round Agreement; and (4) deviated from the applicable standard of review, including in antidumping, countervailing duty, and other unfair trade remedy cases, the standard of review set forth in Article 17.6 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), 1994. Requires the Commission, if it makes an affirmative determination about the action of a panel or an Appellate Body, to determine further whether the action materially affected the outcome of the report.
People & committees
Sen. Baucus, Max [D-MT] · D–MT
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 Finance. (text of measure as introduced: CR S4173-4174)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S4173)
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 18, 2025. 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.676 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.676 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.676 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.676 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.