Adam Schiff (D-CA)
Collaboration on Adversarial Threats and Security Risks Act
A Democratic bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
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
The ``Collaboration on Adversarial Threats and Security Risks Act'' aims to establish how antitrust laws apply to the sharing of artificial intelligence frontier model risks. It allows two or more non-Federal entities to exchange information or assist one another regarding specific artificial intelligence security risks. Additionally, entities may coordinate to delay or limit the release or development of artificial intelligence to reduce these risks. To do this, they must provide written notice to the Assistant Attorney General. The act includes specific limitations to ensure these actions are not used for purposes other than security.
Yes· 3 of 4
- Scored +7
Does this better protect the country from computer attacks?
The bill enables entities to exchange information to mitigate risks related to the theft or weaponization of artificial intelligence and attacks on critical infrastructure.
- Scored +5
Would business owners be better off under this?
The bill provides an antitrust exemption that allows non-federal entities to collaborate on AI security risks without fear of litigation.
- Scored +4
Does this put more rules on large technology companies?
The bill creates a framework for entities to coordinate and limit AI development through notice to the Assistant Attorney General.
The opposite
- Scored -3
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The bill exempts information submitted regarding coordinated AI restrictions from public disclosure requirements.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Information Sharing for Security: Non-Federal entities can exchange information or assistance to protect against various security risks, such as the theft or weaponization of artificial intelligence by a covered nation (Section 3(a)(1)).
-
Mitigating Large-Scale Threats: The bill allows for coordination to reduce risks related to the development of chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons, or the disruption of critical infrastructure (Section 2(6)(B) and Section 2(6)(C)).
-
Control Over AI Development: Entities can coordinate to limit the development or deployment of artificial intelligence that might substantially reduce a person's or agency's ability to oversee or control the technology (Section 2(6)(D)).
-
Protection of Proprietary Information: Information shared with the Assistant Attorney General regarding coordinated restrictions is exempt from public disclosure, which helps protect the substance of the submissions (Section s 3(e)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Risk of Misuse: The exemption does not apply if a non-Federal entity uses received information or assistance for purposes other than the intended security purpose (Section 3(b)).
-
Prohibited Commercial Activities: The act does not permit entities to use these exemptions for price-fixing, allocating markets between competitors, or monopolizing a market (Section 3(d)(1)).
-
Burden of Proof: Any entity claiming the antitrust exemption must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that their actions were taken in good faith and for the exclusive purpose described in the act (Section 3(c)).
-
Risk of Increased Security Threats: The Attorney General can still seek an injunction if they demonstrate that the entities' actions are likely to result in an overall increase in artificial intelligence security risks (Section 4(b)(2)).
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.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this better protect the country from computer attacks? — The bill enables entities to exchange information to mitigate risks related to the theft or weaponization of artificial intelligence and attacks on critical infrastructure.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — The bill provides an antitrust exemption that allows non-federal entities to collaborate on AI security risks without fear of litigation.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more rules on large technology companies? — The bill creates a framework for entities to coordinate and limit AI development through notice to the Assistant Attorney General.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The bill allows companies to coordinate to limit the release of AI technologies that pose significant security or safety risks to the public.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill exempts information submitted regarding coordinated AI restrictions from public disclosure requirements.
- 7/23/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
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.
Jim BanksRepublican · Indiana