S 2934: Protecting Americans from Russian Litigation Act of 2025

S 2934 in plain English: This bill would block private parties from enforcing in U.S. courts certain foreign court judgments or arbitration awards that stem from disputes where compliance with U.S. sanctions or export controls was a factor. The restriction applies to both pending and future claims, though the federal government would remain able to bring such cases.

Stated purpose

The bill aims to ensure that U.S. persons are not penalized for complying with U.S. sanctions or export controls, and to prevent foreign parties from obtaining compensation in U.S. courts for losses caused by a U.S. person's good-faith compliance with those sanctions.

Key points

• Bars private parties from filing U.S. court claims to enforce foreign judgments tied to U.S. sanctions or export control compliance
• Applies when a foreign court claimed jurisdiction based on U.S. sanctions, export controls, or foreign laws responding to them
• Federal government is exempt and may still enforce such foreign judgments or awards
• Covers claims that are already pending when the bill becomes law

Arguments supporters make

• U.S. businesses should not face punishment in their own courts for obeying U.S. law — forcing them to pay foreign judgments for following sanctions undermines the whole point of having sanctions.
• Foreign courts and arbitration panels have used U.S. sanctions as a basis to claim jurisdiction and award damages against American companies, effectively letting adversarial nations weaponize U.S. courts against U.S. policy.
• The bill still allows terrorism victims and parties with U.S.-based arbitration agreements to pursue their claims, so it is narrowly targeted rather than a blanket shield.

Arguments opponents make

• Blocking enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards breaks from long-standing international norms of reciprocal legal recognition, which could lead other countries to stop honoring U.S. court rulings in return.
• Foreign companies that entered contracts in good faith may have lost money when a U.S. partner walked away citing sanctions, and denying them any U.S. court remedy leaves them without a fair path to compensation.
• Applying the prohibition to cases already pending in court retroactively changes the legal rules mid-dispute, raising serious fairness and due-process concerns for parties who structured their cases around existing law.

Tradeoffs

The bill protects U.S. parties from liability for following U.S. law, but does so by closing U.S. courts to foreign claimants who may have legitimate losses, trading international legal comity and individual fairness for the enforcement power of American sanctions policy.

Current status in Congress: Passed Senate.

NewsClear — neutral news & congressional tracking · Bill of the Week