[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 20]
[House]
[Pages 28647-28650]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




        PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS FOR SEPTEMBER 11 VICTIMS ACT OF 2007

  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
Senate bill (S. 2106) to provide nationwide subpoena authority for 
actions brought under the September 11 Victim Compensation Fund of 
2001.
  The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
  The text of the Senate bill is as follows:

                                S. 2106

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Procedural Fairness for 
     September 11 Victims Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) The September 11th Victims Compensation Fund of 2001 
     (49 U.S.C. 40101 note) establishes a Federal cause of action 
     in the United States District Court for the Southern District 
     of New York as the exclusive remedy for damages arising out 
     of the hijacking and subsequent crash of American Airlines 
     flights 11 and 77, and United Airlines flights 93 and 175, on 
     September 11, 2001.
       (2) Rules 45(b)(2) and 45(c)(3)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules 
     of Civil Procedure effectively limit service of a subpoena to 
     any place within, or within 100 miles of, the district of the 
     court by which it is issued, unless a statute of the United 
     States expressly provides that the court, upon proper 
     application and cause shown, may authorize the service of a 
     subpoena at any other place.
       (3) Litigating a Federal cause of action under the 
     September 11 Victims Compensation Fund of 2001 is likely to 
     involve the testimony and the production of other documents 
     and tangible things by a substantial number of witnesses, 
     many of whom may not reside, be employed, or regularly 
     transact business in, or within 100 miles of, the Southern 
     District of New York.

     SEC. 3. NATIONWIDE SUBPOENAS.

       Section 408(b) of the September 11 Victims Compensation 
     Fund of 2001 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(4) Nationwide subpoenas.--
       ``(A) In general.--A subpoena requiring the attendance of a 
     witness at trial or a hearing conducted under this section 
     may be served at any place in the United States.
       ``(B) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection is 
     intended to diminish the authority of a court to quash or 
     modify a subpoena for the reasons provided in clause (i), 
     (iii), or (iv) of subparagraph (A) or subparagraph (B) of 
     rule 45(c)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Nadler) and the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King) each will 
control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.


                             General Leave

  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include 
extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 2106, the Procedural Fairness 
for September 11 Victims Act of 2007. This bill is substantially 
identical to H.R. 3921, a bill that the House Judiciary Committee 
reported by voice vote without amendment on October 24.
  This legislation would provide immediate procedural relief to the 
victims of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, by implementing 
a technical fix to a bill that this Congress passed in the wake of 
those horrible events.
  Eleven days after the September 11 attacks, we passed comprehensive 
legislation, the Transportation and Systems Stabilization Act. That 
Act, among other things, created a Victims Compensation Fund to provide 
relief for victims without the need for litigation. It also allowed 
victims to opt-out of the fund and seek relief in court.
  The bill limited jurisdiction over any civil litigation to the United 
States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
  An unintended consequence of our actions, under operation of the 
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, was that subpoena power to secure 
testimony or documents from nonparty witnesses to any litigation has 
generally been limited to persons and documents located within 100 
miles of the Southern District of New York.
  The law we passed in 2001 did not take this 100-mile rule into 
account.

[[Page 28648]]

Unfortunately, many of the events relevant to the September 11 tragedy 
occurred in Boston, where American Airlines Flight 11 and United 
Airlines Flight 175 originated, and in the Washington, DC, area where 
the Pentagon is located and where American Airlines Flight 77 
originated. Both of these locations are far outside the 100-mile limit 
from the Southern District of New York.
  The bill before the House today would remedy this problem by 
providing for nationwide subpoena service for all parties in the 
litigation, victims, victims' families and defendants, to ensure that 
all parties involved have an opportunity to obtain the witnesses and 
evidence they need to obtain a fair hearing. That was Congress' intent, 
and we should not allow the unintended interplay between the 9/11 
legislation and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to undermine that 
legislative purpose.
  The bill also makes clear that the existing power of the Federal 
court under rule 45(c) to quash or modify a subpoena in order to 
protect a subpoenaed person from undue hardship or expense is 
maintained. That is the current rule, and the bill makes it clear that 
this important protection for witnesses will remain.
  Congress has previously approved nationwide subpoena power in other 
contexts. For example, nationwide subpoena power is available under the 
False Claims Act, the Veterans Benefit Act and the Civil RICO statute.
  This bill has bipartisan support. It passed the Senate by unanimous 
consent in committee and on the Senate floor. The House version, which 
is substantively identical to the Senate version, was reported by the 
House Judiciary Committee by voice vote.
  Six years ago, Mr. Speaker, Congress and the Nation came together to 
provide prompt and equitable assistance for September 11 victims. I 
urge my colleagues to ensure that the laudable goals of that effort are 
not frustrated by the unintended effect of the Federal Rules of Civil 
Procedure in this particular case.
  I urge the adoption of this measure.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I support S. 2106, the Procedural Fairness for September 
11 Victims Act of 2007.
  In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Congress created an 
operational alternative compensation program for victims killed or 
injured during the attacks.
  This statute mandates that liability for all claims resulting from 
the 9/11 attacks is limited to an amount no greater than the limits of 
liability coverage maintained by the air carriers involved.
  The statute further provides that compensation may only be obtained 
pursuant to a Federal cause of action brought in U.S. District Court 
for the Southern District of New York, where a consolidated action is 
already pending.
  Representatives of several passengers, ground victims and others are 
suing airline companies, airport security firms, airport authorities, 
and other defendants. The litigation focuses on events in New York; 
Washington, DC; Boston Logan Airport; and other areas around the 
country.
  In most civil litigation brought in Federal court, rule 45, mentioned 
by my colleague from New York, of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 
limits the service of trial subpoenas to nonparty witnesses to the 
district and State where the case was filed ``or at any place without 
the district that is within 100 miles of the place of trial.'' This 
limitation precludes the issuance of some subpoenas in the 9/11 
litigation.
  However, rule 45 also states, Mr. Speaker, that service may take 
place elsewhere pursuant to another Federal statute. For example, 
Congress allows for nationwide service under the False Claims Act, 
under the Veterans Benefits Act, and under the Civil RICO statute.
  If this nationwide service feature is not extended to the 9/11 
victims compensation law, a number of important witnesses will not be 
able to testify in person during the litigation.
  There are alternatives to S. 2106, such as conducting pretrial, 
nonparty depositions around the country or videoconferencing, but they 
might prove costly. They're more likely to deny the jury the benefit of 
live, firsthand testimony.
  Mr. Speaker, the bill applies equally to plaintiffs and defendants. 
The legislation promotes justice that is based on Federal precedent in 
other areas of law.
  On this subject matter in this particular case, I agree with my 
colleague. This is a piece of legislation that did pass out of the full 
Judiciary Committee by voice vote, without any discernible opposition, 
something that brings us together here in this Congress, and I urge 
adoption.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. NADLER. I would add, it's somewhat rare in the Judiciary 
Committee, as my colleague knows.
  Mr. Speaker, I now yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Bishop).
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. I thank my colleague from New York for 
yielding.
  On behalf of my colleagues of New York's congressional delegation, 
and as one who represents families of the first responders and victims 
of the September 11 terrorist attacks, I'm proud to rise as the sponsor 
of the House companion to this important legislation.
  I also wish to thank my 11 cosponsors and the distinguished chairman 
of the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Conyers, as well as the Democratic 
leadership for expediting the consideration of this bill.
  The Procedural Fairness for September 11 Victims Act of 2007, as its 
title implies, ensures fairness for the victims of the terrorist 
attacks by correcting a shortcoming in the Federal Rules of Civil 
Procedure and by reversing an unintended consequence of the bill that 
established the September 11 Victim Compensation Fund.
  Although I was not yet in Congress, many of my colleagues who were 
here at that time will recall when this body passed the bill creating 
the compensation fund in 2001.
  Shortly thereafter, the Justice Department administered how the fund 
could allow victims of the terrorist attacks or their families to apply 
for financial assistance following the loss of loved ones who perished 
on that tragic day.
  The Justice Department also designated the Southern District of New 
York as the only court in which 9/11 claims could be litigated if 
victims and their families chose to opt out of the fund.
  As a result of this designation and a flaw in the Federal Rules of 
Civil Procedure, families of the victims, as well as the defendants in 
the 9/11 cases, cannot gain access to testimony or documents from 
witnesses who did not live within 100 miles of the Southern District of 
New York.
  But there's really no logical reason why victims and their families 
should be prevented from securing documents and witnesses just because 
they happen to be more than 100 miles outside the Southern District.
  It is obvious that many of the victims aboard the four airliners that 
crashed and those who were killed inside the World Trade Center and at 
the Pentagon, as well as those who witnessed these horrific events, 
resided well outside of this 100-mile radius of the Southern District 
of New York.
  And it should be assumed that many of the families of the victims who 
are involved in the 9/11 claims, or those who will seek compensation at 
a later date, as well as the witnesses, still live in the same 
locations across the country. Therefore, geography simply should have 
no role in how they seek compensation.
  In response to this problem, this bill amends the Air Transportation 
Safety and System Stabilization Act to provide for nationwide subpoena 
power to all parties involved, victims, their families and the 
defendants, when litigating 9/11 claims.

[[Page 28649]]

  Simply put, this bill establishes a full measure of justice by 
allowing subpoenas to be served anywhere in the country, ensuring that 
all the parties involved in the 9/11 suits can gain all of the 
information necessary to try these cases fully and fairly.
  My colleagues on both sides of the aisle can agree that justice 
requires that all the parties to cases arising under the Victims 
Compensation Fund have access to all the testimony and documents 
relevant to their claims, regardless of where the witnesses or 
documents are located in the United States.
  Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support the 
Procedural Fairness for September 11 Victims Act of 2007. Once again, I 
want to thank the Judiciary Committee for reporting this measure to the 
floor so promptly, and I thank the leadership for moving it.
  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself so much time as I may 
consume. I just conclude with some of the time that I yield to myself, 
and I will do so briefly. Sometimes we put a lot of words into our 
dialogue here, and I just wanted to put it into the simple words.
  This bill says a subpoena may be served at any place in the United 
States with regard to this Act. Very simple. It's something that I do 
believe provides a better opportunity for justice and equity for those 
who are involved in a cause of action on this 9/11 victims 
compensation, and so I urge adoption of this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the complicated debate over this bill is not so 
complicated. It's a very simple bill, as you heard. There's unanimous 
agreement on it. It ought to pass. I thank the leadership. I thank the 
leadership and the minority leadership on the Judiciary Committee for 
expediting the bill to where it is now. I urge my colleagues to support 
this legislation.

                                S. 2106

  Mr. HALL of New York. I am very pleased that today the House passed 
S. 2106, the Procedural Fairness for September 11 Victims Act. This 
bill is the Senate companion to an important piece of legislation I 
sponsored along with my good friend Representative Tim Bishop of Long 
Island.
  To start off I'd like to thank Mr. Bishop for introducing this 
important bill in the House, and Mr. biden for introducing it in the 
Senate. This is a simple bill, but a vital one to the people who it 
will affect, and I applaud both gentlemen for calling it to my 
attention, and that of the Congress as a whole.
  Shortly after the 9/11 attacks, Congress passed legislation to the 
effect that those victims and families of victims seeking legal redress 
as a result of the events of 9/11 may do so only in the federal court 
in the Southern District of New York. However, under the Federal /Rules 
of Civil Procedure, parties can only issue subpoenas for testimony and 
documents located within 100 miles of the District. This means that a 
significant percentage of evidence that might be relevant to the case 
is unobtainable to the participants only because it is not located 
within the New York City metropolitan area.
  When Congress mandated that only one specific court could hear 
lawsuits from those people who opted out of the 9/11 Compensation Fund, 
no one foresaw that the decision would prove to be a barrier for those 
people who seek evidence from outside the jurisdiction of this court. 
But there is no alternative as to where they can bring suit.
  I am proud to support this bill because it fixes this unintended flaw 
by providing nation-wide subpoena power to all the parties involved in 
litigating 9/11 claims. The 9/11 attacks were an attack on the whole 
country. It was a tragedy that greatly affected us all. There's no 
reason why victims should be prevented from obtaining possibly vital 
evidence, just because it happens to be outside the jurisdiction's 
direct subpoena power.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 
2106, the Senate companion to H.R. 3921, the ``Procedural Fairness for 
September 11th Victims Act of 2007.'' This legislation amends the Air 
Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act to allow those 
September 11th victims and their families who opted out of receiving 
compensation through the September 11th Victims Compensation Fund to 
have nation-wide subpoena power when litigating September 11th claims. 
It is necessary to make this change because presently all parties 
involved in litigating September 11th claims--victims, victims' 
families and defendants--must do so in the U.S. District Court for the 
Southern District of New York. The problem occurs because under the 
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, no party may compel testimony or 
documents from non-party witnesses who do not live within 100 miles of 
the Southern District of New York. This bill would provide for nation-
wide subpoena power for all parties. The court however, would retain 
its authority to modify or quash any subpoena that it determined to be 
too burdensome.
  Mr. Speaker, within 11 days of the September 11th attacks, Congress 
drafted, debated, adopted and signed into law the Air Transportation 
Safety and Systems Stabilization Act (ATSSSA), 49 U.S.C. Section 40101. 
Among other things, this legislation included assistance to the airline 
industry and created an optional alternative compensation program for 
individual victims killed or injured by the events of September 11th 
(the September 11th Compensation Fund). The United States District 
Court for the Southern District of New York was designated as the only 
court with ``original and exclusive jurisdiction over all actions 
brought'' arising out of the attacks of September 11th. The objective 
was to consolidate all litigation arising out of September 11th events 
in one location before a single court that could adjudicate all the 
claims in a thorough, efficient, equitable and fair proceeding.
  Given the justifiable interest of Congress in expediting assistance 
to the airline industry and creating a mechanism to provide 
compensation to the persons who bore the brunt of the national trauma 
occurring on September 11th, it is understandable that the Congress did 
not give due regard to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45, which 
provides for service of trial subpoena to non-party witnesses in the 
district or State where the case was filed or anyplace within 100 miles 
of the district that the court proceedings will take place (the ``100 
mile bulge'').
  The upshot, Mr. Speaker, is that in the absence of this minor change, 
subpoenas would be limited to within 100 miles of the Southern District 
of New York (within 100 miles of Manhattan) and could not reach the 
geographically significant and relevant locales of Boston, 
Massachusetts (from where flights American Airlines 11 and United 
Airlines 175 originated) and Washington Dulles Airport (from where 
American Airlines flight 77 originated).
  Pending before the District Court for the Southern District of New 
York is the consolidated action, In re September 11 Litigation, in 
which representatives of a number of passengers and ground victims 
(including claims brought by those who came to the World Trade Center 
disaster site to assist with the debris removal effort following the 
attacks), as well as an array of parties suing for property damage and 
consequential economic loss are seeking recovery from a group of 
defendants including airline companies, airport security firms, airport 
authorities, the Boeing Corporation and others.
  This litigation focuses not only on the events that occurred at the 
Twin Towers in Manhattan but also hundreds of miles away at 
Washington's Dulles Airport, Boston's Logan Airport and various other 
locations around the Nation, including the headquarters for each of the 
various airlines and security companies. It has become clear that in 
order for the September 11th victims, their families, and the 
defendants to have access to all the evidence relevant to the case, it 
is necessary to make available at trial non-party witnesses from 
Massachusetts, Virginia, and elsewhere. The legislation before us 
accomplishes this limited objective.
  H.R. 3921 is non-controversial, bipartisan and bicameral. There has 
been no opposition to the bill from any interested sectors. the 
legislation is identical to S. 2106, which was introduced by Senator 
Biden of Delaware on September 27, 2007 and passed by unanimous consent 
in the Judiciary Committee and the full Senate the following day. That 
bill was referred to the House Judiciary Committee as the sole 
referral. Mr. Speaker, for the reasons stated, I strongly support H.R. 
3921 and urge my colleagues to join me in voting for this wise and 
beneficial legislation.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the Senate bill, S. 2106.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the Senate bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

[[Page 28650]]



                          ____________________