Skip to main content
HR 1544 105th Congress House Law Administration of justice Administrative law judges Administrative procedure Appellate courts Congress Congressional reporting requirements Economics and Public Finance Federal employees Federal officials Government Operations and Politics Government litigation Government regulation Judicial opinions Judicial review of administrative acts National policy Parties to actions Supreme Court decisions

Federal Agency Compliance Act

Introduced: May 7, 1997 See on congress.gov
 Everywhere this bill has been 28 steps
Introduced
In committee
Reported out
Passed House
Passed Senate
To President
Became law
Feb 26, 1998
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Feb 25, 1998
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Feb 25, 1998
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 241 - 176 (Roll no. 24).
Feb 25, 1998
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 241 - 176 (Roll no. 24).
Feb 25, 1998
The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.
Feb 25, 1998
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
Feb 25, 1998
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 1544.
Feb 25, 1998
The House resolved into Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for further consideration.
Feb 25, 1998
Considered as unfinished business.
Feb 25, 1998
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union rises leaving H.R. 1544 as unfinished business.
Feb 25, 1998
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the end of debate on the Jackson-Lee amendment, the Chair put the question and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Jackson-Lee demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings until later in the day.
Feb 25, 1998
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate.
Feb 25, 1998
The Speaker designated the Honorable Jo Ann Emerson to act as Chairwoman of the Committee.
Feb 25, 1998
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 367 and Rule XXIII.
Feb 25, 1998
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 1544 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit. Measure will be read by section. Bill is open to amendments. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the bill.
Feb 25, 1998
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 367. (consideration: CR H587-598; H609-611)
Feb 25, 1998
Rule H. Res. 367 passed House.
Feb 24, 1998
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 367 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 1544 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit. Measure will be read by section. Bill is open to amendments. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the bill.
Nov 8, 1997
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 230.
Nov 8, 1997
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 105-395.
Sep 17, 1997
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Sep 17, 1997
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Jul 24, 1997
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Jul 24, 1997
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
May 22, 1997
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
May 14, 1997
Referred to the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law.
May 7, 1997
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
May 7, 1997
Introduced in House
 Votes taken on this bill 1
DateChamberWhat was voted onResultYes–No
Feb 25, 1998 House · vote #24 On Passage Passed 241176 See who voted →
 Plain-English summary Congressional Research Service

Federal Agency Compliance Act - Requires a Federal agency and its officers and employees, in administering a statute, rule, regulation, program, or policy (statute) within a judicial circuit, to adhere to the existing precedent respecting the interpretation and application of such statute, as established by the decisions of the U.S. court of appeals for that circuit, with exceptions.

Allows an agency to take a position, either in administration or litigation, that is at variance with such precedent if: (1) it is uncertain whether the administration of the statute will be subject to review by the appeals court that established that precedent or a court of appeals for another circuit; (2) the Government did not seek further review of the case in which that precedent was first established in that appeals court or the U.S. Supreme Court because neither the United States nor any agency or officer thereof was a party to the case or because the decision establishing that precedent was otherwise substantially favorable to the Government; or (3) it is reasonable to question the continued validity of that precedent in light of a subsequent decision of that appeals court or the U.S. Supreme Court, a subsequent change in any pertinent statute or regulation, or any other subsequent change in the public policy or circumstances on which that precedent was based.

Requires: (1) the officers of any Federal agency supervising the conduct of litigation to ensure that the initiation, defense, and continuation of proceedings in the U.S. courts within, or subject to the jurisdiction of, a particular judicial circuit avoids unnecessarily repetitive litigation on questions of law already consistently resolved against the U.S. position in precedents established by the U.S. courts of appeals for three or more other judicial circuits; (2) decisions on whether to initiate, defend, or continue litigation for purposes of this Act to take into account specified factors, including the effect of intervening changes in pertinent law or the public policy or circumstances on which the established precedents were based; and (3) the Attorney General to report annually to specified congressional committees on the Federal agency efforts to comply with such requirements. Specifies that a decision on whether to initiate, defend, or continue litigation is not subject to court review on the grounds that the decision violates such requirements.

What's happening now February 26, 1998

Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.

 Committees of jurisdiction 3