Ashley Hinson (R-IA)
Protecting American Industry and Labor from International Trade Crimes Act of 2026
A Republican bill with 27 Democratic cosponsors · See all 44 cosponsors
Last activity — Received in the Senate.
Passed one chamber, waiting for the other to take it up
Passed one chamber, and the other has not yet sent it to a committee or put it on its calendar.
The other chamber will hand it to a committee, place it on its calendar, or leave it where it is. Nothing has been decided, and a bill can sit here indefinitely.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- Passed House voice vote
- Awaiting Senate
The House by voice vote (members called out yes or no together): no member's position on it was recorded.
What this bill would do
The Protecting American Industry and Labor from International Trade Crimes Act of 2026 aims to increase the Department of Justice's ability to fight trade-related crimes. It establishes a new structure, such as a task force or program, within the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice to investigate and prosecute these crimes. This includes creating new positions for criminal trial attorneys and support personnel. The act focuses on crimes like smuggling, trade-based money laundering, and the evasion of duties and tariffs. It also requires the Attorney General to provide annual reports to Congress on the progress and funding of these efforts.
Yes· 3 of 12
- Scored +4
Does this make it easier to run a small business?
Enforcing trade laws and stopping illegal smuggling and duty evasion protects law-abiding domestic businesses from unfair foreign competition.
- Scored +4
Does this make trade with other countries easier?
The bill targets illicit trade practices like smuggling and tariff evasion, promoting fairer international trade standards.
- Scored +3
Would business owners be better off under this?
Domestic business owners benefit from stronger enforcement against illegal trade practices and unfair foreign competition.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Prosecution of Health and Safety Crimes: The act seeks to increase the number of investigations and prosecutions for health, safety, financial, and economic trade-related crimes, including violations of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the Toxic Substances Control Act (Section 4(a)(2)).
-
Better Government Coordination: The act requires the new structure to promote interaction with the public, industry representatives, and law enforcement, and ensures that different components enforcing trade laws consult with each other (Section 3(b)(3) and Section 4(a)(6)).
-
Stronger Enforcement Capabilities: By creating new positions for experienced and technically qualified prosecutors and support personnel, the Department of Justice can better lead investigations that impact more than one district (Section 3(b)(1) and 3(b)(2)).
-
Accountability through Reporting: The Attorney General must submit annual reports to Congress detailing the volume of charges, indictments, and how funds were spent, which provides transparency on the use of public money (Section 5).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Increased Legal Risk: The act explicitly states that litigation by the Criminal Division does not stop other criminal prosecutions or civil actions from being pursued for the same trade-related violations (Section 4(b)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Enforcing trade laws and stopping illegal smuggling and duty evasion protects law-abiding domestic businesses from unfair foreign competition. Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The bill includes enforcement against health and safety-related trade violations, helping protect consumers from illicit imports. Is this likely to grow the economy? — By cracking down on international trade crimes and duty evasion, the bill supports fair competition for domestic industries. Is this likely to create jobs? — The bill creates new positions within the Department of Justice for criminal trial attorneys and support personnel.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — Domestic business owners benefit from stronger enforcement against illegal trade practices and unfair foreign competition. Would union members be better off under this? — Union workers benefit from protections against illegal trade and smuggling that undermine domestic manufacturing and labor.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill mandates regular reporting to congressional committees detailing enforcement statistics and funding usage. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill expands federal prosecutorial authority and creates new structures within the Department of Justice.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this make trade with other countries easier? — The bill targets illicit trade practices like smuggling and tariff evasion, promoting fairer international trade standards.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this tighten control of the border? — The legislation enhances coordination with customs and border protection agencies to investigate smuggling and trade violations.
- Education And Technology
- Does this make patent and copyright rules fairer? — The legislation encompasses enforcement against counterfeiting and intellectual property crimes related to imports.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The bill explicitly includes enforcement of toxic substances and environmental-related import/export regulations.
- 9/14/2026
- Received in the Senate.
- 8/31/2026
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
- On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5273-5274)
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1869.
- Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5273-5275)
- Mr. Schmidt moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
- 8/27/2026
- Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 119-782.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 683.
- 6/3/2026
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 23 - 0.
- 12/12/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/9/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/31/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/4/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/9/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/7/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/17/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/7/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/31/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/26/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/21/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/5/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 33 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Sanford BishopDemocrat · Georgia
Suzanne BonamiciDemocrat · Oregon
Nikki BudzinskiDemocrat · Illinois
Kathy CastorDemocrat · Florida
André CarsonDemocrat · Indiana
J. CorreaDemocrat · California
Ben ClineRepublican · Virginia
Juan CiscomaniRepublican · Arizona
Herbert ConawayDemocrat · New Jersey
Rosa DeLauroDemocrat · Connecticut
Donald DavisDemocrat · North Carolina
Christopher DeluzioDemocrat · Pennsylvania
Debbie DingellDemocrat · Michigan
Brad FinstadRepublican · Minnesota
Josh GottheimerDemocrat · New Jersey
Carlos GimenezRepublican · Florida
Clay HigginsRepublican · Louisiana
Glenn IveyDemocrat · Maryland
Mike KellyRepublican · Pennsylvania
Ro KhannaDemocrat · California
Raja KrishnamoorthiDemocrat · Illinois
Kevin KileyIndependent · California
Ted LieuDemocrat · California
Darin LaHoodRepublican · Illinois
Susie LeeDemocrat · Nevada
John MoolenaarRepublican · Michigan
Seth MoultonDemocrat · Massachusetts
Frank MrvanDemocrat · Indiana
Nathaniel MoranRepublican · Texas
Troy NehlsRepublican · Texas
Donald NorcrossDemocrat · New Jersey
Dan NewhouseRepublican · Washington
Zachary NunnRepublican · Iowa
Deborah RossDemocrat · North Carolina
Michael RulliRepublican · Ohio
Josh RileyDemocrat · New York
Elise StefanikRepublican · New York
Greg StantonDemocrat · Arizona
Haley StevensDemocrat · Michigan
William TimmonsRepublican · South Carolina
Ritchie TorresDemocrat · New York
Jill TokudaDemocrat · Hawaii
Eugene VindmanDemocrat · Virginia
Robert WittmanRepublican · Virginia