S. 550Senate115th Congress (2017-2019)In Committee

Restoring Statutory Rights and Interests of the States Act of 2017

Introduced March 7, 2017

AI-Generated Summary

Updated April 15, 2026 at 1:27 PM UTC

The Restoring Statutory Rights and Interests of the States Act of 2017 changes the Federal Arbitration Act so that individuals and small businesses cannot be forced to arbitrate certain legal claims. It preserves the right to bring lawsuits in court for damages or injunctive relief when a claim involves a federal or state law, the U.S. Constitution, or a state constitution, unless both parties agree to arbitrate after the claim has already arisen. The bill also makes it easier to overturn arbitration awards that were issued in violation of these new rules.

Key Provisions

  • Adds an exception to the Federal Arbitration Act: written arbitration clauses cannot require individuals or small businesses to arbitrate claims for damages or injunctive relief that arise from alleged violations of federal or state statutes or constitutional provisions, unless the arbitration agreement is made after the claim exists and only covers that specific claim.
  • Specifies that courts—not arbitrators—must decide whether an arbitration agreement is subject to the Act’s provisions, even when the party challenging arbitration raises other contract defenses.
  • Amends the rules for vacating arbitration awards so that any award issued in violation of the new Section 2 exception can be set aside.
  • Applies the new rules to any dispute that arises on or after the law’s effective date.

Legislative Activity

Stay on top of the latest movement without scrolling through every action

1 earlier action
SenateIntro Referral Latest Action

Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S1642)

March 7, 2017

View full timeline
SenateIntro Referral

Introduced in Senate

March 7, 2017

SenateIntro Referral

Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S1642)

March 7, 2017

Floor Debate

3 members

What members said about S. 550 on the floor

3 Democrats
Dianne Feinstein
Sen. Dianne FeinsteinD-CA · Mar 7, 2017

Mr. President, today I am reintroducing a bill for the private relief of Shirley Constantino Tan. Ms. Tan is a Filipina national living in Pacifica, CA. She is the proud mother of 20-year-old U.S.…

Jack Reed
Sen. Jack ReedD-RI · Mar 7, 2017

Mr. President, today I am reintroducing the Cybersecurity Disclosure Act of 2017 along with two members of the Select Committee on Intelligence, Senator Collins, and the ranking member, Senator…

Patrick J. Leahy
Sen. Patrick J. LeahyD-VT · Mar 7, 2017

Mr. President, today, I have reintroduced legislation to protect Americans from being stripped of their legal rights by little known clauses that are now hidden in an alarming number of contracts.…

Patrick J. Leahy
Sen. Patrick J. LeahyD-VT · Mar 7, 2017

Mr. President, today, I have reintroduced legislation to protect Americans from being stripped of their legal rights by little known clauses that are now hidden in an alarming number of contracts.…

Bill Text

Latest available legislative text

Reading Mode
Latest
Introduced in SenateIssued March 7, 2017

II

115th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 550

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

March 7, 2017

Mr. Leahy (for himself, Mr. Franken, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Markey, Ms. Warren, Mrs. Murray, Ms. Baldwin, Ms. Heitkamp, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Brown, Mr. Booker, and Mrs. Shaheen) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To restore statutory rights to the people of the United States from forced arbitration.

1.

Short title

This Act may be cited as the Restoring Statutory Rights and Interests of the States Act of 2017.

2.

Findings and intent

(a)

Findings

Congress finds the following:

(1)

Chapter 1 of title 9, United States Code (commonly known as the Federal Arbitration Act), represented an exercise of legislative power that required courts to recognize private voluntary agreements to arbitrate commercial disputes at a time when the courts were refusing to do so on grounds that arbitration represented a usurpation of the authority of the courts to resolve legal disputes.

(2)

The Federal Arbitration Act did not, and should not have been interpreted to, supplant or nullify the legislatively created rights and remedies that Congress, exercising its power under article I of the Constitution of the United States, has granted to the people of the United States for resolving disputes in State and Federal courts.

(3)

Recent court decisions, including AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 333 (2011) and American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant, 133 S. Ct. 2304 (2013), have interpreted the Federal Arbitration Act to broadly preempt rights and remedies established under substantive State and Federal law. As a result, these decisions have enabled business entities to avoid or nullify legal duties created by congressional enactment, resulting in millions of people in the United States being unable to vindicate their rights in State and Federal courts.

(4)

States have a compelling interest in enacting rights and remedies to protect the welfare of their citizens, and the Federal Arbitration Act should not be, and should not have been, interpreted to preempt State legislation that enacted rights and remedies to protect the welfare of their citizens.

(b)

Intent of Congress

In enacting this Act, it is the intent of Congress—

(1)

to restate and reinstitute the primacy of congressional and State legislative bodies as the creators of the rights and remedies available to all the people of the United States;

(2)

to clarify that congressionally established rights and remedies may not be waived prior to the institution of a dispute by the party intended to be protected by such statute; and

(3)

to reinstate and reaffirm existing rights and remedies of the people of the United States enacted since the enactment of the Federal Arbitration Act regarding access to the courts that have, or may have been, abrogated or diminished.

3.

Arbitration of Federal statutory causes of action

(a)

Adjudication of Federal statutory rights of action

Section 2 of title 9, United States Code, is amended—

(1)

by striking A written and inserting (a) In general.—Except as provided in subsection (b), a written; and

(2)

by adding at the end the following:

(b)

Exception

Subsection (a) shall not apply to a written provision that requires arbitration of a claim for damages or injunctive relief brought by an individual or small business concern (as defined in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632)), in either an individual or representative capacity, arising from the alleged violation of a Federal or State statute, the Constitution of the United States, or a constitution of a State, unless the written agreement to arbitrate is entered into by both parties after the claim has arisen and pertains solely to an existing claim.

(c)

Interaction with State law

In subsection (a), the term grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of a contract includes a Federal or State statute, or the finding of a Federal or State court, that prohibits the agreement to arbitrate on grounds that the agreement is unconscionable, invalid because there was no meeting of the minds, or otherwise unenforceable as a matter of contract law or public policy.

(d)

Validity and enforceability

A determination as to whether this chapter applies to an agreement to arbitrate shall be made by a court, rather than an arbitrator, irrespective of whether the party resisting arbitration challenges the agreement to arbitrate specifically or in conjunction with other terms of the contract containing such agreement.

.

4.

Vacating an award made in violation of section 2 of title 9, United States Code

Section 10(a) of title 9, United States Code, is amended—

(1)

in paragraph (3), by striking or at the end;

(2)

in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and inserting ; or; and

(3)

by adding at the end the following:

(5)

where the arbitration took place in violation of section 2.

.

5.

Applicability

This Act, and the amendments made by this Act, shall apply with respect to any dispute or claim that arises on or after the date of enactment of this Act.