A Republican bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See all 2 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill is officially known as the Promoting Responsible Online Technology and Ensuring Consumer Trust Act or the PROTECT Act. The main purpose of the bill is to completely repeal section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934. Additionally, the bill makes various conforming amendments across multiple titles of the United States Code and other Acts to update references previously tied to section 230. These updates replace old references with new definitions, such as updating the definition of an interactive computer service under section 223(i) of the Communications Act of 1934. Finally, the bill states that all of these amendments will take effect directly on the date of the enactment of the Act.
Yes· 3 of 5
- Scored +7
Does this put more rules on large technology companies?
Repealing Section 230 removes a major legal shield used by large technology companies, effectively increasing their legal liability.
- Scored +5
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
The repeal of Section 230 may increase consumer recourse against online platforms for hosted content.
- Scored +3
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
The removal of immunity could provide more legal avenues for individuals to seek redress in court.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this change how police departments operate?
Removing liability protections may impact how online evidence and communication are treated in legal proceedings.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Section 2: The bill repeals section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934. Because the provided text does not contain any further explanations or details about this repeal, no other positive outcomes or benefits are mentioned.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Section 2: The text of the bill explicitly repeals section 230 and updates other laws to remove references to it, but the provided text does not contain any explanations of negative consequences or burdens.
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.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more rules on large technology companies? — Repealing Section 230 removes a major legal shield used by large technology companies, effectively increasing their legal liability.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The repeal of Section 230 may increase consumer recourse against online platforms for hosted content.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Increased platform liability may provide better legal avenues for low-income individuals facing online harms. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Increased legal accountability for digital services may impact digital environments in highly connected urban areas.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The removal of immunity could provide more legal avenues for individuals to seek redress in court.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this change how police departments operate? — Removing liability protections may impact how online evidence and communication are treated in legal proceedings.
- 9/3/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/20/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 1/13/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- 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.
Mark DeSaulnierDemocrat · California
Cory MillsRepublican · Florida