S. 3574

119 S3574 IS: Ending Chinese Lawfare Act
 U.S. Senate
 2025-12-18
 text/xml
 EN
 Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.
 II  119th CONGRESS  1st Session  S. 3574  IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES   December 18, 2025   Mr. Schmitt  introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the  Committee on the Judiciary    A BILL
To prohibit United States courts from recognizing, enforcing, or giving effect to any judgment, order, decree, or provisional measure issued by a court of the People’s Republic of China in a proceeding motivated by retaliation for lawful acts, including political speech.
1.
Short title
This Act may be cited as the   Ending Chinese Lawfare Act  .
2.
Findings
Congress finds the following:
(1)
The judicial system of the People’s Republic of China is constitutionally subordinate to the Chinese Communist Party, which exercises ultimate authority over judicial outcomes.
(2)
Courts of the People’s Republic of China have been used as instruments of state policy, including by retaliating against foreign officials, governments, businesses, and individuals for protected political speech and lawful sovereign acts.
(3)
The United States has a compelling interest in protecting the First Amendment rights of its officials and citizens, preserving national sovereignty, and preventing foreign governments from weaponizing judicial processes to chill lawful conduct.
(4)
Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in the United States is a matter of comity, not obligation, and Congress has authority to regulate or prohibit such recognition whenever it conflicts with the Constitution, laws, or public policy of the United States.
(5)
Politically motivated foreign judgments pose a direct threat to democratic governance and judicial integrity whenever foreign courts are used to punish speech or official action protected under United States law.
3.
Prohibition on recognition or enforcement of politically-motivated judgments
(a)
General rule
No court of the United States, or of any State, territory, or possession of the United States, may recognize, enforce, or give effect to any judgment, order, decree, or provisional measure issued by a court of the People’s Republic of China if the United States court determines that the proceeding at which such issuance occurred—
(1)
was initiated, directed, controlled, or materially supported by the Chinese Communist Party, the Government of the People’s Republic of China, or any instrumentality of either such entity; and
(2)
was substantially motivated by retaliation for—
(A)
protected political speech;
(B)
the lawful exercise of governmental authority; or
(C)
the exercise of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
(b)
Evidentiary standard
A United States court may make a determination described in subsection (a) based on the totality of the circumstances, including—
(1)
the lack of judicial independence in the originating forum;
(2)
the identity of the plaintiff or its affiliation with the Chinese Communist Party or state entities;
(3)
public statements by Chinese officials relating to the proceeding;
(4)
the nature of the claims asserted and their relationship to protected speech or sovereign acts; and
(5)
the absence of due process or neutral adjudication.
4.
Fee-shifting and deterrence
If a party seeks recognition or enforcement of a judgment, order, decree, or provisional measure barred under section 3, the prevailing party opposing enforcement shall be awarded reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses, including expert fees.
5.
Federal jurisdiction and removal
(a)
Original jurisdiction
The district courts of the United States shall have original jurisdiction over any action seeking recognition or enforcement of a judgment, order, decree, or provisional measure described in section 3(a).
(b)
Removal
Any action described in subsection (a) that is commenced in a State court may be removed to the appropriate United States district court by any party.
6.
Department of Justice intervention
(a)
Right To intervene
The Attorney General may intervene, as of right, in any proceeding involving the recognition or enforcement of a judgment, order, decree, or provisional measure described in section 3(a).
(b)
Statement of interest
The Attorney General may submit a statement of interest regarding the political nature of the foreign proceeding, the lack of judicial independence, or the foreign policy interests of the United States, which the United States court shall give substantial weight.
7.
First Amendment and Sovereignty Protection Clause
No judgment described in section 3(a) may be recognized or enforced if such recognition or enforcement would—
(1)
penalize, burden, or chill speech or conduct protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; or
(2)
interfere with the lawful exercise of United States sovereign authority.
8.
Declaratory and injunctive relief
(a)
Civil action authorized
Any person, State, or governmental entity that is a party to, the subject of, or the target of a proceeding in a court of the People’s Republic of China described in section 3(a), and that has incurred or is incurring concrete costs, burdens, or restraints as a result of such proceeding, may bring a civil action in a United States district court for declaratory and injunctive relief.
(b)
Injury in fact
For purposes of article III of the Constitution of the United States, an injury in fact shall be deemed to exist if the plaintiff demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the court—
(1)
participation in, or exposure to, a foreign judicial proceeding described in section 3; and
(2)
(A)
legal expenses or compliance costs;
(B)
reputational injury;
(C)
a credible chilling effect on constitutionally protected speech or conduct;
(D)
impairment of property, contractual, or financial interests; or
(E)
a substantial risk of enforcement efforts affecting United States-based interests.
(c)
Relief
In any action under this section, the court may—
(1)
declare the foreign judgment or proceeding is not recognizable or enforceable in the United States; and
(2)
grant appropriate injunctive relief to prevent any attempt to seek recognition or enforcement of such judgment.
9.
Rule of construction
Nothing in this Act may be construed to require a United States court to recognize or enforce any foreign judgment. This Act establishes a minimum standard of nonrecognition and does not limit other grounds for refusing enforcement under Federal or State law.
10.
Severability
If any provision of this Act, or the application of such provision, is held invalid, the remainder of this Act and other applications of this Act shall not be affected.