Private Property Rights Implementation Act of 2000
Latest action. Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Private Property Rights Implementation Act of 2000 - Amends the Federal judicial code to provide that whenever a district court exercises jurisdiction under civil rights provisions in an action in which the operative facts concern the uses of real property, it shall not abstain from exercising or relinquish its jurisdiction to a State court in an action in which no claim of a violation of a State law, right, or privilege is alleged, if a parallel proceeding in State court arising out of the same operative facts as the district court proceeding is not pending. Specifies that: (1) if the district court has jurisdiction over such an action in which the operative facts concern the uses of real property and which cannot be decided without resolution of an unsettled question of State law, it may certify the State law question to the highest appellate court of that State; and (2) after the State appellate court resolves the question certified to it, the district court shall proceed with resolving the merits. Prohibits the district court from certifying a question of State law unless such question will significantly affect the merits of the injured party's Federal claim and such question is patently unclear. Declares that any claim or action brought under provisions regarding civil actions for deprivation of rights to redress the deprivation of a property right or privilege secured by the Constitution shall be ripe for adjudication by the district courts upon a final decision rendered by any person acting under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage of any State or territory of the United States that causes actual and concrete injury to the party seeking redress. Sets forth provisions regarding what constitutes a "final decision." Specifies that: (1) the party seeking redress shall not be required to apply for an appeal or waiver if no such appeal or waiver is available, if it cannot provide the relief requested, or if the application or re-application would be futile; (2) the failure to act within a reasonable time on any application, re-application, appeal, waiver, or review of the case shall constitute a disapproval; and (3) a case is ripe for adjudication even if the party seeking redress does not exhaust judicial remedies provided by any State or territory of the United States. (Sec. 3) Declares that any claim brought under provisions regarding the United States as a defendant, or under provisions regarding jurisdiction of the Court of Federal Claims, that is founded upon a property right or privilege secured by the Constitution but allegedly infringed or taken by the United States, shall be ripe for adjudication upon a final decision rendered by the United States that causes actual and concrete injury to the party seeking redress. (Sec. 5) Requires a Federal agency, whenever it takes action limiting the use of private property that may be affected by the amendments made by this Act, not later than 30 days after the agency takes that action, to give notice to the owners of that property explaining their rights and the procedures for obtaining any compensation that may be due to them under such amendments.
Written by analysts at the Congressional Research Service and published on Congress.gov, not by Civibrief. Summarized at the "Passed House amended" stage on March 16, 2000. It describes the bill, it is not the legal text.
Where is it in the process, and what happens next?
4 steps remain before this bill could become law.
The record's latest action, on March 20, 2000: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- Clearing the committees it was referred to, and being scheduled for a floor vote
- Passage by the House
- Passage by the Senate
- The President's signature. If the President vetoes it, two-thirds of both chambers must vote to override.
How likely is it to become law?
Civibrief does not forecast outcomes and this page has no opinion about this one. What the record supports is a base rate, which is a fact about the whole pile, not a prediction about this measure.
In the 106th Congress (1999-00), 580 of the 9,158 bills and joint resolutions introduced became law, about 6.3 percent. That count covers every measure at every stage, including the many that never left committee.
This one is not there yet: 4 steps are still outstanding, listed above.
Has anyone actually voted on it?
No. No roll call in this Congress cites this measure. That is the ordinary outcome: most measures never reach a recorded floor vote, and a committee ends most of them simply by not acting.
A vote is not the only thing that happens to a measure. Hearings, markups, and referrals are all recorded actions, and none of them is a vote of the full chamber.
Who is behind it?
CHARLES CANADY (R-FL) introduced it on June 29, 1999, and 112 members have since signed on as cosponsors.
Cosponsoring is a formal signature on the text. It is not a commitment to vote for the measure, it does not bind anyone's party, and a long list of cosponsors is a measure of attention rather than of prospects.
How long has it been in play?
It was introduced on June 29, 1999, 9935 days ago. The most recent recorded action was 9670 days ago, on March 20, 2000.
Measures do not carry over. Anything the 106th Congress has not finished by January 3, 2001 dies when the term ends, and has to be introduced again from the start in the next Congress.
Every answer above is assembled from this measure's own record on Congress.gov and from published counts of what Congress has passed before. Civibrief does not predict outcomes and takes no position on any measure.
Vote history
- HouseIn committee, no floor vote yet
- SenateAwaits House passage
- PresidentAwaits both chambers