was used (or that would have been used, as the case 
may be) by the State in carrying out its duties 
under this title. 
(3) HEARING; PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.—In de-
veloping a redistricting plan for a State, the court 
shall— 
(A) hold one or more evidentiary hearings 
at which interested members of the public may 
appear and be heard and present testimony, in-
cluding expert testimony, in accordance with 
the rules of the court; and 
(B) consider other submissions and com-
ments by the public, including proposals for re-
districting plans to cover the entire State or 
any portion of the State. 
(4) USE OF SPECIAL MASTER.—To assist in the 
development and publication of a redistricting plan 
for a State under this section, the court shall ap-
point a special master to make recommendations to 
the court on possible plans for the State. 
(e) PUBLICATION OF PLAN.— 
(1) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY OF INITIAL PLAN.— 
Upon completing the development of one or more 
initial redistricting plans, the court shall make the 
plans available to the public at no cost, and shall 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
22:09 Jul 30, 2025
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H4632.IH
H4632
ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
also make available the underlying data used to de-
velop the plans and a written evaluation of the plans 
against external metrics (as described in section 
304(c)). 
(2) PUBLICATION
OF
FINAL
PLAN.—At any 
time after the expiration of the 14-day period which 
begins on the date the court makes the plans avail-
able to the public under paragraph (1), and taking 
into consideration any submissions and comments by 
the public which are received during such period, the 
court shall develop and publish the final redistricting 
plan for the State. 
(f) USE OF INTERIM PLAN.—In the event that the 
court is not able to develop and publish a final redis-
tricting plan for the State with sufficient time for an up-
coming election to proceed, the court may develop and 
publish an interim redistricting plan which shall serve as 
the redistricting plan for the State until the court develops 
and publishes a final plan in accordance with this section. 
Nothing in this subsection may be construed to limit or 
otherwise affect the authority or discretion of the court 
to develop and publish the final redistricting plan, includ-
ing the discretion to make any changes the court deems 
necessary to an interim redistricting plan. 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
22:09 Jul 30, 2025
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H4632.IH
H4632
ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
(g) APPEALS.—Review on appeal of any final or in-
terim plan adopted by the court in accordance with this 
section shall be governed by the appellate process in sec-
tion 306. 
(h) STAY OF STATE PROCEEDINGS.—The filing of an 
action under this section shall act as a stay of any pro-
ceedings in State court with respect to the State’s congres-
sional redistricting plan unless otherwise ordered by the 
court. 
SEC. 306. CIVIL ENFORCEMENT. 
(a) CIVIL ENFORCEMENT.— 
(1) ACTIONS BY ATTORNEY GENERAL.—The At-
torney General may bring a civil action for such re-
lief as may be appropriate to carry out this title. 
(2) AVAILABILITY OF PRIVATE RIGHT OF AC-
TION.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—Any person residing or 
domiciled in a State who is aggrieved by the 
failure of the State to meet the requirements of 
the Constitution or Federal law, including this 
title, with respect to the State’s congressional 
redistricting, may bring a civil action in the 
United States district court for the applicable 
venue for such relief as may be appropriate to 
remedy the failure. 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
22:09 Jul 30, 2025
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H4632.IH
H4632
ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
(B) SPECIAL RULE FOR CLAIMS RELATING 
TO
PARTISAN
ADVANTAGE.—For purposes of 
subparagraph (A), a person who is aggrieved by 
the failure of a State to meet the requirements 
of section 303(b) may include— 
(i) any political party or committee in 
the State; and 
(ii) any registered voter in the State 
who resides in a congressional district that 
the voter alleges was drawn in a manner 
that contributes to a violation of such sec-
tion. 
(C) NO AWARDING OF DAMAGES TO PRE-
VAILING PARTY.—Except for an award of attor-
ney’s fees under subsection (d), a court in a 
civil action under this section shall not award 
the prevailing party any monetary damages, 
compensatory, punitive, or otherwise. 
(3) DELIVERY OF COMPLAINT TO HOUSE AND 
SENATE.—In any action brought under this section, 
a copy of the complaint shall be delivered promptly 
to the Clerk of the House of Representatives and the 
Secretary of the Senate. 
(4) EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION AND APPLICABLE 
VENUE.—The district courts of the United States 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
22:09 Jul 30, 2025
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H4632.IH
H4632
ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
shall have exclusive jurisdiction to hear and deter-
mine claims asserting that a congressional redis-
tricting plan violates the requirements of the Con-
stitution or Federal law, including this title. The ap-
plicable venue for such an action shall be the United 
States District Court for the District of Columbia or 
for the judicial district in which the Capital of the 
State is located, as selected by the person bringing 
the action. In a civil action that includes a claim 
that a redistricting plan is in violation of subsection 
(a) or (b) of section 303, the United States District 
Court for the District of Columbia shall have juris-
diction over any defendant who has been served in 
any United States judicial district in which the de-
fendant resides, is found, or has an agent, or in the 
United States judicial district in which the Capital 
of the State is located. Process may be served in any 
United States judicial district where a defendant re-
sides, is found, or has an agent, or in the United 
States judicial district in which the Capital of the 
State is located. 
(5) USE
OF
3-JUDGE
COURT.—If an action 
under this section raises statewide claims under the 
Constitution or this title, the action shall be heard 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
22:09 Jul 30, 2025
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H4632.IH
H4632
ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
by a 3-judge court convened pursuant to section 
2284 of title 28, United States Code. 
(6) REVIEW OF FINAL DECISION.—A final deci-
sion in an action brought under this section shall be 
reviewable on appeal by the United States Court of 
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which 
shall hear the matter sitting en banc. There shall be 
no right of appeal in such proceedings to any other 
court of appeals. Such appeal shall be taken by the 
filing of a notice of appeal within 10 days of the 
entry of the final decision. A final decision by the 
Court of Appeals may be reviewed by the Supreme 
Court of the United States by writ of certiorari. 
(b) EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION.—In any action 
brought under this section, it shall be the duty of the dis-
trict court, the United States Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia Circuit, and the Supreme Court of 
the United States (if it chooses to hear the action) to ad-
vance on the docket and to expedite to the greatest pos-
sible extent the disposition of the action and appeal. 
(c) REMEDIES.— 
(1) ADOPTION OF REPLACEMENT PLAN.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—If the district court in 
an action under this section finds that the con-
gressional redistricting plan of a State violates, 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
22:09 Jul 30, 2025
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H4632.IH
H4632
ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
such a remedial plan which has not 
been approved by the court. 
(B) PROHIBITING USE OF PLANS IN VIOLA-
TION OF REQUIREMENTS.—No court shall order 
a State to use a congressional redistricting plan 
which violates, in whole or in part, the require-
ments of this title, or to conduct an election 
under terms and conditions which violate, in 
whole or in part, the requirements of this title. 
(C) SPECIAL RULE IN CASE FINAL ADJU-
DICATION NOT EXPECTED WITHIN 3 MONTHS 
OF ELECTION.— 
(i) DUTY OF COURT.—If final adju-
dication of an action under this section is 
not reasonably expected to be completed at 
least 3 months prior to the next regularly 
scheduled primary election for the House 
of Representatives in the State, the district 
court shall— 
(I) develop, adopt, and order the 
use of an interim congressional redis-
tricting plan in accordance with sec-
tion 305(f) to address any claims 
under this title for which a party 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
22:09 Jul 30, 2025
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H4632.IH
H4632
ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
seeking relief has demonstrated a sub-
stantial likelihood of success; or 
(II) order adjustments to the 
timing of primary elections for the 
House of Representatives and other 
related deadlines, as needed, to allow 
sufficient opportunity for adjudication 
of the matter and adoption of a reme-
dial or replacement plan for use in the 
next regularly scheduled general elec-
tions for the House of Representa-
tives. 
(ii) PROHIBITING FAILURE TO ACT ON 
GROUNDS OF PENDENCY OF ELECTION.— 
The court may not refuse to take any ac-
tion described in clause (i) on the grounds 
of the pendency of the next election held in 
the State or the potential for disruption, 
confusion, or additional burdens with re-
spect to the administration of the election 
in the State. 
(2) NO
STAY
PENDING
APPEAL.—Notwith-
standing the appeal of an order finding that a con-
gressional redistricting plan of a State violates, in 
whole or in part, the requirements of this title, no 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
22:09 Jul 30, 2025
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H4632.IH
H4632
ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
stay shall issue which shall bar the development or 
adoption of a replacement or remedial plan under 
this subsection, as may be directed by the district 
court, pending such appeal. If such a replacement or 
remedial plan has been adopted, no appellate court 
may stay or otherwise enjoin the use of such plan 
during the pendency of an appeal, except upon an 
order holding, based on the record, that adoption of 
such plan was an abuse of discretion. 
(3) SPECIAL
AUTHORITY
OF
COURT
OF
AP-
PEALS.— 
(A) 
ORDERING
OF
NEW
REMEDIAL 
PLAN.—If, upon consideration of an appeal 
under this title, the Court of Appeals deter-
mines that a plan does not comply with the re-
quirements of this title, it shall direct that the 
District Court promptly develop a new remedial 
plan with assistance of a special master for con-
sideration by the Court of Appeals. 
(B) FAILURE
OF
DISTRICT
COURT
TO 
TAKE TIMELY ACTION.—If, at any point during 
the pendency of an action under this section, 
the District Court fails to take action necessary 
to permit resolution of the case prior to the 
next regularly scheduled election for the House 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
22:09 Jul 30, 2025
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H4632.IH
H4632
ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
of Representatives in the State or fails to grant 
the relief described in paragraph (1)(C), any 
party may seek a writ of mandamus from the 
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 
Circuit. The Court of Appeals shall have juris-
diction over the motion for a writ of mandamus 
and shall establish an expedited briefing and 
hearing schedule for resolution of the motion. If 
the Court of Appeals determines that a writ 
should be granted, the Court of Appeals shall 
take any action necessary, including developing 
a congressional redistricting plan with assist-
ance of a special master to ensure that a reme-
dial plan is adopted in time for use in the next 
regularly scheduled election for the House of 
Representatives in the State. 
(4) EFFECT OF ENACTMENT OF REPLACEMENT 
PLAN.—A State’s enactment of a redistricting plan 
which replaces a plan which is the subject of an ac-
tion under this section shall not be construed to 
limit or otherwise affect the authority of the court 
to adjudicate or grant relief with respect to any 
claims or issues not addressed by the replacement 
plan, including claims that the plan which is the 
subject of the action was enacted, in whole or in 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
22:09 Jul 30, 2025
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H4632.IH
H4632
ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
part, with discriminatory intent, or claims to con-
sider whether relief should be granted under section 
3(c) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. 
10302(c)) based on the plan which is the subject of 
the action. 
(d) ATTORNEY’S FEES.—In a civil action under this 
section, the court may allow the prevailing party (other 
than the United States) reasonable attorney fees, includ-
ing litigation expenses, and costs. 
(e) RELATION TO OTHER LAWS.— 
(1) RIGHTS
AND
REMEDIES
ADDITIONAL
TO 
OTHER
RIGHTS
AND
REMEDIES.—The rights and 
remedies established by this section are in addition 
to all other rights and remedies provided by law, and 
neither the rights and remedies established by this 
section nor any other provision of this title shall su-
persede, restrict, or limit the application of the Vot-
ing Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. 10301 et seq.). 
(2) VOTING RIGHTS ACT OF 1965.—Nothing in 
this title authorizes or requires conduct that is pro-
hibited by the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. 
10301 et seq.). 
(f) LEGISLATIVE PRIVILEGE.—No person, legisla-
ture, or State may claim legislative privilege under either 
State or Federal law in a civil action brought under this 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
22:09 Jul 30, 2025
Jkt 059200
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H4632.IH
H4632
ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS