LegisTrack
Back to all bills
S 2934119th CongressIn Committee

Protecting Americans from Russian Litigation Act of 2025

Introduced: Sep 29, 2025
Sponsor: Sen. Cornyn, John [R-TX] (R-Texas)
Civil Rights & Justice
Standard Summary
Comprehensive overview in 1-2 paragraphs

The Protecting Americans from Russian Litigation Act of 2025 would curb the ability to enforce certain foreign judgments or arbitral awards in U.S. courts when those judgments arise from or are connected to actions taken to comply with U.S. sanctions. Specifically, it adds a new provision to Title 28 (Section 1660) that bars any civil action in federal or state courts to recognize or enforce a foreign judgment or award if the underlying claim arose from sanctions-related compliance or if the issuing court based jurisdiction on U.S. sanctions or export controls. It also authorizes removal and dismissal of such enforcement actions to U.S. district court. The bill preserves a narrow set of preexisting authorities and rights, notably those of U.S. government actions, victims of terrorism or related crimes with certain statuses, and contractual rights where disputes are to be resolved in U.S. courts or in U.S. arbitration (but not for enforcement of the foreign judgment or award described in the main prohibition). The act defines “United States sanctions” as prohibitions or restrictions imposed by the U.S. under law (e.g., the International Emergency Economic Powers Act or export-control authorities) and excludes import duties. The act applies prospectively to civil actions pending on or after enactment. In short, the bill aims to prevent foreign courts from leveraging sanctions-based claims to obtain enforcement of foreign judgments or arbitral awards in U.S. courts, and it provides a mechanism for U.S. courts to dismiss such actions.

Key Points

  • 1What the law prohibits: No person (other than the U.S. itself or a U.S.-acting entity) may bring or pursue in U.S. courts a civil action to enforce a foreign judgment or foreign arbitral award if the claim arose from sanctions-related compliance or if the foreign court’s jurisdiction relied on U.S. sanctions or export controls.
  • 2Removal and dismissal: Defendants can remove enforcement actions to a U.S. district court, which must dismiss the action.
  • 3Narrow carve-outs (rule of construction): The act preserves certain U.S. government authorities and specific rights under chosen circumstances (e.g., rights of victims of terrorism or related crimes for U.S. nationals or certain U.S. government-related personnel, and contract rights where disputes are already designated to be resolved in U.S. courts or U.S. arbitration, but not for enforcement of the foreign judgment/award described in the main prohibition).
  • 4What counts as “United States sanctions”: Broadly defined to include prohibitions, restrictions, or conditions on transactions involving foreign entities or nationals imposed to protect national security, foreign policy, or the U.S. economy, under the IEEA or other laws (excluding import duties).
  • 5Applicability: The provision applies to civil actions pending on or after the date of enactment (not retroactive to actions filed before).
  • 6Title and purpose framing: The act is titled to emphasize protecting Americans from litigation arising from or connected to sanctions-related actions, with specific focus on Russian-related policy framing in the title, though the text uses sanctions more generally.

Impact Areas

Primary group/area affected- U.S. persons and entities (including companies and individuals) involved in or subject to U.S. sanctions who might otherwise face enforcement actions in foreign judgments or awards tied to sanctions compliance.Secondary group/area affected- Foreign judgment or arbitral-award creditors seeking to enforce cross-border claims in U.S. courts; they would face a new barrier to recognition/enforcement if the underlying claim relates to sanctions compliance.Additional impacts- U.S. court systems: potential reduction in enforcement-related caseload for sanctions-connected disputes, and a need to apply the new Section 1660 as a threshold for enforcement actions involving foreign judgments or awards.- International business and dispute resolution: could alter strategies around how sanctions compliance disputes are framed and where disputes are resolved (given the prohibition on enforcing certain foreign judgments in the U.S.).- Sanctions policy tools: the act would constrain certain remedies that foreign parties might rely on to pressure U.S. sanctioned individuals or entities through international or cross-border litigation.- Policy and legal risk: potential tensions with international comity principles and existing mechanisms for recognizing foreign judgments and arbitral awards, though the bill creates a targeted restriction tied specifically to sanctions-based claims.
Generated by gpt-5-nano on Oct 16, 2025