PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S4677-4678)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 23, 2009
Presidential Signing Statements Act of 2009 - Prohibits any state or federal court from relying on or deferring to a presidential signing statement as a source of authority when determining the meaning of any Act of Congress.
Requires any federal or state court, in any action, suit, or proceeding regarding the construction or constitutionality, or both, of any Act of Congress in which a presidential signing statement was issued, to permit the Senate, through the Office of Senate Legal Counsel, or the House, through the Office of General Counsel for the House, or both, to participate as an amicus curiae, and to present an oral argument on the question of the Act's construction or constitutionality, or both.
Authorizes the full Congress, in any such suit, to pass a concurrent resolution declaring its view of the proper interpretation of the Act of Congress at issue, clarifying Congress's intent or its findings of fact, or both.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the federal or state court in question to permit Congress, through the Office of Senate Legal Counsel, to submit any such passed resolution into the record of the case as a matter of right.
Makes it the duty of each federal or state court, including the U.S. Supreme Court, to advance on the docket and to expedite to the greatest possible extent the disposition of any matter brought under this Act.
People & committees
Sen. Specter, Arlen [R-PA] · R–PA
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 the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S4677-4678)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S4676-4677)
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.875 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.875 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.875 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.875 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.