LegisTrack
Back to all bills
HR 432119th CongressIn Committee

Seventh Amendment Restoration Act

Introduced: Jan 15, 2025
Standard Summary
Comprehensive overview in 1-2 paragraphs

The Seventh Amendment Restoration Act would change how certain agency adjudications are reviewed. Specifically, it amends 5 U.S.C. § 702 to add a new subsection (b) that allows a person who is the subject of an action heard by an agency hearing officer (such as an administrative law judge or other agency employee who hears the case) to remove that action to a United States district court. The removal would be filed in the district where the person resides or has a principal place of business, using the same removal process as litigants use to remove actions from state court to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1446. The bill defines “agency hearing officer” broadly to include ALJs and similar agency personnel. The title signals an aim to restore Seventh Amendment rights by providing an option to move agency actions into federal court. In short, if enacted, individuals or entities facing agency decisions could opt to have their case heard in federal district court instead of in the agency’s internal or external administrative review process, subject to the standard removal procedures and the district court’s jurisdiction.

Key Points

  • 1Adds a new removal right: A party can remove an action brought before an agency hearing officer to a U.S. district court.
  • 2Scope of removal: The district court can be in the district where the party resides or has a principal place of business.
  • 3Procedure for removal: The removal must be filed in the district court in the same manner as a removal from a state court to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1446.
  • 4Who may be removed: The term “agency hearing officer” is defined to include administrative law judges or other agency employees authorized to hear the action.
  • 5Name and framing: The bill is titled the “Seventh Amendment Restoration Act,” suggesting a link to restoring jury-trial or court-review rights associated with the Seventh Amendment, though the bill text focuses on forum transfer rather than explicitly guaranteeing a jury trial.

Impact Areas

Primary group/area affected- Individuals and entities subject to agency actions who would prefer federal court review. This includes businesses and individuals who face adverse agency decisions and want potentially different standards of review or procedural protections available in federal court.Secondary group/area affected- Administrative agencies and their adjudicatory processes. A shift of proceedings to federal court could affect agency caseloads, procedures, and timing, and may influence how agencies design or defend their determinations.Additional impacts- Legal standards and remedies: Moving review to federal court could alter the applicable standards of review (e.g., APA review in federal court) and the potential remedies available. The bill does not specify the standard of review in federal court, so that would likely be determined by existing law (e.g., APA standards) or as interpreted by courts after enactment.- Potential interaction with Seventh Amendment rights: While the bill’s title frames this as restoring Seventh Amendment rights, the text itself centers on the ability to remove to federal court rather than explicitly guaranteeing jury trials. Whether a jury trial would be available in federal court for these actions would depend on applicable Seventh Amendment jurisprudence and the nature of the underlying claims.- Access to federal forums and litigation costs: Removing cases to federal court could change filing timelines, discovery rules, and potential costs, possibly broadening access to federal judicial review for some litigants while increasing complexity for others.
Generated by gpt-5-nano on Nov 18, 2025