United States Research Protection Act

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/1318
Last Updated: September 7, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Kennedy, Mike [R-UT-3]

ID: K000403

Follow the money

The bill

United States Research Protection Act

HR. 1318, 119th Congress — read as touching AI & Cloud Infrastructure.

The sponsor

Rep. Kennedy, Mike [R-UT-3]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$157,510 raised

20 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

85% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of State" section, p. 211-213 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

March 24, 2025

Introduced

Committee Review

Floor Action

Passed House

Senate Review

📍 Current Status

Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the 119th Congress. Let's dissect this farce and expose the real disease beneath.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The United States Research Protection Act (HR 1318) claims to "clarify" the definition of a foreign country for purposes of malign foreign talent recruitment restriction. How noble. In reality, this bill is a thinly veiled attempt to justify xenophobic paranoia and protect American research interests from those pesky foreigners.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill amends the Research and Development, Competition, and Innovation Act by inserting "of concern" after "foreign country," because who needs precision when you can just add a vague phrase? It also strikes subparagraph (B) and redesignates clauses, because who doesn't love a good game of legislative musical chairs?

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects: researchers, academics, and anyone with a foreign-sounding name. But let's be real, the only stakeholders who matter are the ones with deep pockets and a vested interest in maintaining America's research supremacy.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a Band-Aid on a bullet wound. It won't stop foreign talent from being recruited; it'll just make it more difficult for American researchers to collaborate with their international peers. The real impact will be felt by the countless students, scientists, and engineers who'll be forced to navigate this Byzantine bureaucracy.

Now, let's get to the root of this legislative disease: fear-mongering, nationalism, and a healthy dose of xenophobia. This bill is a symptom of America's insecurity complex – we're so afraid of being surpassed by other nations that we'd rather strangle our own research community than risk collaborating with "foreigners."

In conclusion, HR 1318 is a masterclass in legislative obfuscation, designed to appease the ignorant and the fearful. It's a bill that says, "We're protecting America from those scary foreigners!" while actually doing nothing but harming American research interests.

Diagnosis: Legislative xenophobia with a side of bureaucratic red tape.

Treatment: A healthy dose of skepticism, a strong stomach for hypocrisy, and a willingness to call out this farce for what it is – a desperate attempt to cling to a fading era of American exceptionalism.

Related Topics

Foreign Aid & DiplomacyImmigration & Border Security
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Kennedy, Mike [R-UT-3]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$157,510
20 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$0
Committees
$0
Individuals
$157,510

No PAC contributions found

No organization contributions found

No committee contributions found

1
ULRICH, DAVE
1 transaction
$10,000
2
BRENCHLEY, ROXANE
1 transaction
$9,900
3
BRENCHLEY, SHAWN
1 transaction
$9,900
4
JOHNSON, HEATHER
1 transaction
$9,900
5
JOHNSON, JOHN
1 transaction
$9,900
6
KENNEDY, HUGH
1 transaction
$9,900
7
KENNEDY, JACOB
1 transaction
$9,900
8
ULANOFF, DORY
1 transaction
$9,900
9
ZUPANCICH, ANTHONY
1 transaction
$9,900
10
PLUMB, WALTER III
1 transaction
$6,700
11
HEMMERT, DANIEL
1 transaction
$6,600
12
REAGAN, WILLIAM K
1 transaction
$6,600
13
SHURTZ, LINCOLN
1 transaction
$6,600
14
DURSTELER, BLAKE E
1 transaction
$6,600
15
CONLEE, ROBERT
1 transaction
$6,600
16
PETERSON, JAMIE
1 transaction
$6,600
17
PETERSON, TROY
1 transaction
$6,600
18
HAFEN, MARK
1 transaction
$5,205
19
SHEFFER, CLAY
1 transaction
$5,205
20
VON BATTEN, KARL
1 transaction
$5,000

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 1 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Stevens, Haley M. [D-MI-11]

ID: S001215

Top Contributors

33

1
MATCH-E-BE-NASH-SHE-WISH BAND OF POTTAWATOMI INDIANS
OrganizationSHELBYVILLE, MI
$3,300
Oct 31, 2024
2
EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS
OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC
$3,300
Nov 6, 2024
3
MATCH-E-BE-NASH-SHE-WISH BAND OF POTTAWATOMI INDIANS
OrganizationSHELBYVILLE, MI
$3,300
Dec 29, 2023
4
NOTTAWASEPPI HURON BAND OF THE POTAWATOMI
OrganizationFULTON, MI
$3,300
Mar 6, 2024
5
POKAGON BAND OF POTAWATOMI INDIANS
OrganizationDOWAGIAC, MI
$3,300
Sep 29, 2023
6
SAGINAW CHIPPEWA INDIAN TRIBE
OrganizationMT PLEASANT, MI
$3,300
Sep 29, 2023
7
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,650
Jun 5, 2023
8
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN
$1,650
Apr 29, 2024
9
SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION
OrganizationEL CAJON, CA
$1,500
Oct 24, 2023
10
SAN MANUEL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS
OrganizationLOS ANGELES, CA
$1,000
Dec 29, 2023

Donor Network - Rep. Kennedy, Mike [R-UT-3]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Loading...

Showing 28 nodes and 32 connections

Total contributions: $32

Top Donors - Rep. Kennedy, Mike [R-UT-3]

Showing top 20 donors by contribution amount

20 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 3 harmed.

  • Section 2 clarifies the definition of foreign country for purposes of malign foreign talent recruitment restriction, which may impact AI labs and cloud infrastructure providers' ability to recruit international talent, potentially increasing costs or reducing competitiveness (SEC. 2).

  • The restriction on malign foreign talent recruitment may also affect semiconductor and hardware companies that rely on international talent, potentially disrupting their research and development efforts (SEC. 2).

  • −Big Tech Platformsconfidence 0.70

    Large tech platforms may be impacted by the clarified definition of foreign country, as they often have international recruitment programs and collaborations, which could be restricted or complicated by this provision (SEC. 2).

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Department of State

Strong
Vector: 63%
Pages: 211-213AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 1318 aligns with Project 2025's focus on national security by targeting foreign talent recruitment from countries of concern, particularly China, Iran, Venezuela, Russia, and North Korea, which are emphasized in the State Department section as existential threats requiring heightened scrutiny."

Key themes:national securityforeign talent recruitmentcountries of concernChina threatvisa program scrutiny

— 178 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise interior immigration enforcement. This Administration’s humanitarian crisis—which is arguably the greatest humanitarian crisis in the modern era, one which has harmed Americans and foreign nationals alike—will take many years and billions of dollars to fully address. One casualty of the Biden Administration’s behavior will be the current form of the U.S. Refugee Admission Program (USRAP). The federal government’s obligation to shift national security–essential screening and vetting resources to the forged border crisis will necessitate an indefinite curtailment of the number of USRAP refugee admissions. The State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, which administers USRAP, must shift its resources to challenges stemming from the current immigration situation until the crisis can be contained and refugee-focused screening and vetting capacity can reasonably be restored. l Strengthening bilateral and multilateral immigration-focused agreements. Restoration of both domestic security and the integrity of the U.S. immigration system should start with rapid reactivation of several key initiatives in effect at the conclusion of the Trump Administration. Reimplementation of the Remain in Mexico policy, safe third-country agreements, and other measures to address the influx of non-Mexican asylum applicants at the United States–Mexico border must be Day One priorities. Although the State Department must rein in the C-175 authorities of other agencies, the Department of Homeland Security should retain (or regain) C-175 authorities for negotiating bilateral and multilateral security agreements. l Evaluation of national security–vulnerable visa programs. To protect the American people, the State Department, in coordination with the White House and other security-focused agencies, should evaluate several key security-sensitive visa programs that it manages. Key programs include, but should not be limited to, the Diversity Visa program, the F (student) visa program, and J (exchange visitor) visa program. The State Department’s evaluation must ensure that these programs are not only consistent with White House immigration policy, but also align with its national security obligations and resource limitations. PIVOTING ABROAD Personnel and management adjustments are crucial preludes to refocus the State Department’s mission, which is implementing the President’s foreign policy agenda and, in so doing, ensuring that the interests of American citizens are given — 179 — Department of State priority. That said, the next President must significantly reorient the U.S. govern- ment’s posture toward friends and adversaries alike—which will include much more honest assessments about who are friends and who are not. This reorien- tation could represent the most significant shift in core foreign policy principles and corresponding action since the end of the Cold War. Although not every country or issue area can be discussed in this chapter, below are examples of several areas in which a shift in U. S. foreign policy is not only import- ant, but arguably existential. The point is not to assert that everyone in the evolving conservative movement, or, in some cases, the growing bipartisan consensus, will agree with the details of this assessment. Rather, what is presented below demon- strates the urgency of these issues and provides a general roadmap for analysis. In a world on fire, a handful of nations require heightened attention. Some rep- resent existential threats to the safety and security of the American people; others threaten to hurt the U.S. economy; and others are wild cards, whose full threat scope is unknown but nevertheless unsettling. The five countries on which the next Administration should focus its attention and energy are China, Iran, Venezuela, Russia, and North Korea. The People’s Republic of China The designs of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Chinese Com- munist Party, which runs the PRC, are serious and dangerous.9 This tyrannical country with a population of more than 1 billion people has the vision, resources, and patience to achieve its objectives. Protecting the United States from the PRC’s designs requires an unambiguous offensive-defensive mix, including protecting American citizens and their interests, as well as U.S. allies, from PRC attacks and abuse that undermine U.S. competitiveness, security, and prosperity. The United States must have a cost-imposing strategic response to make Bei- jing’s aggression unaffordable, even as the American economy and U.S. power grow. This stance will require real, sustained, near-unprecedented U.S. growth; stronger partnerships; synchronized economic and security policies; and American energy independence—but above all, it will require a very honest perspective about the nature and designs of the PRC as more of a threat than a competitor.10 The next President should use the State Department and its array of resources to reassess and lead this effort, just as it did during the Cold War. The U.S. government needs an Article X for China,11 and it should be a presidential mandate. Along with the National Security Council, the State Department should draft an Article X, which should be a deeply philosophical look at the China challenge. Many foreign policy professionals and national leaders, both in government and the private sector, are reluctant to take decisive action regarding China. Many are vested in an unshakable faith in the international system and global norms. They are so enamored with them they cannot brook any criticisms or reforms, let alone

Trade

Strong
Vector: 62%
Pages: 852-854AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and the Project 2025 trade section focus on protecting U.S. technology and intellectual property from foreign exploitation, particularly by countries of concern such as China, through restrictions on talent flows and heightened scrutiny of international collaborations."

Key themes:technology protectionnational securityforeign talent restrictionsChina economic aggressionintellectual property theft

— 819 — Trade 14. Adam Behsudi, “Duffy Finds 18 Co-sponsors for Bill to Increase Trump’s Tariff Powers,” Politico, January 24, 2019, https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/24/duffy-finds-18-co-sponsors-for-bill-to-increase-trumps- trade-powers-2555509 (accessed February 26, 2023). 15. FTAs like NAFTA represent a carve-out from the WTO’s unconditional MFN rule and generally lead to tariffs that tend to be set at more reciprocal levels. 16. H.R.764, United States Reciprocal Trade Act, § 3(b)(1) and (b)(2). 17. Damian Paletta, “Speaker Ryan Admits Defeat, Giving up on Border Adjustment Tax,” The Washington Post, July 27, 2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/07/27/paul-ryan-admits-defeat-giving- up-on-border-adjustment-tax/ (accessed February 25, 2023). 18. This section draws on analyses in White House Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy, How China’s Economic Aggression Threatens the Technologies and Intellectual Property of the United States and the World, June 2018, https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/FINAL-China-Technology- Report-6.18.18-PDF.pdf (accessed February 25, 2023). 19. Bloomberg News, “Xi’s Vow of World Dominance by 2049 Sends Chill Through Markets,” October 26, 2022, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-26/xi-s-vow-of-world-dominance-by-2049-sends-chill- through-markets?leadSource=uverify%20wall (accessed February 25, 2023). 20. Executive Office of the President, United States Trade Representative, 2017 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance, January 2018, https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Press/Reports/China%202017%20 WTO%20Report.pdf (accessed February 25, 2023). 21. White House Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy, How China’s Economic Aggression Threatens the Technologies and Intellectual Property of the United States and the World. 22. The National Medium- and Long-Term Program for Science and Technology Development Plan (2006–2020): An Outline, The State Council, The People’s Republic of China, p. [55], https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/ Cybersecurity/Documents/National_Strategies_Repository/China_2006.pdf (accessed March 21, 2023). 23. Commission on the Theft of American Intellectual Property, Update to the IP Commission Report: The Theft of American Intellectual Property: Reassessments of the Challenge and United States Policy, February 2017, pp. 2, 11, and 12, http://www.ipcommission.org/report/IP_Commission_Report_Update_2017.pdf (accessed February 25, 2023). 24. The laws, which have been put in place for national security purposes, have been promulgated under the Arms Export Control Act (AECA), 22 U.S.C. Ch. 39, §§ 2751–2756, 2761–2781, 2785, and 2791–27999aa-2, https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/chapter-39 (accessed February 25, 2023) and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), 50 U.S.C. Ch. 35, §§ 1701–1708, https://www.law.cornell.edu/ uscode/text/50/chapter-35 (accessed February 25, 2023). 25. Ministry of Education, People’s Republic of China, “Statistics on Studying in China in 2018,” http://www.moe. gov.cn/was5/web/search?searchword=Statistics+on+Studying+in+China+in+2018&channelid=254028&page=1 (accessed March 21, 2023). 26. Michael Brown and Pavneet Singh, “China’s Technology Transfer Strategy: How Chinese Investments in Emerging Technology Enable a Strategic Competitor to Access the Crown Jewels of U.S. Innovation, Updated with 2016 and 2017 Data,” Defense Innovation Unit Experimental (DIUx), January 2018, https://admin.govexec. com/media/diux_chinatechnologytransferstudy_jan_2018_(1).pdf (accessed February 25, 2023). The DIUx describes itself as “the only DOD Organization focused on accelerating the adoption of commercial and dual- use technology to solve operational challenges at speed and scale.” Defense Innovation Unit Experimental, “About,” https://www.diu.mil/ (accessed February 25, 2023). 27. Brown and Singh, “China’s Technology Transfer Strategy: How Chinese Investments in Emerging Technology Enable a Strategic Competitor to Access the Crown Jewels of U.S. Innovation, Updated with 2016 and 2017 Data,” p. 18. 28. Ingrid Lunden, “Huawei Puts $1M into a New AI Research Partnership with UC Berkeley,” TechCrunch, October 11, 2016, https://techcrunch.com/2016/10/11/huawei-puts-1m-into-a-new-ai-research-partnership-with- ucberkeley/ (accessed February 25, 2023). 29. Press release, “President Trump Announces Strong Actions to Address China’s Unfair Trade,” Office of the United States Trade Representative, March 22, 2018, https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/ press-releases/2018/march/president-trump-announces-strong (accessed February 25, 2023).

Department of Labor and Related Agencies

Moderate
Vector: 64%
Pages: 645-647AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and the Project 2025 policy aim to protect American workers from unfair foreign influence—HR 1318 by restricting malign foreign talent recruitment in research, and Project 2025 by prioritizing American hiring, combating visa fraud, and addressing unfair labor competition. However, the bill focuses on research security rather than broad labor hiring or visa enforcement, resulting in only moderate thematic overlap."

Key themes:foreign talent restrictionsprotecting American workersnational/economic securityvisa fraud concernsinternational competition

— 613 — Department of Labor and Related Agencies l Congress must amend the law so that employers can again have the freedom to make hiring Americans a priority. Despite the significant advantages that preferring citizens over (work-authorized) aliens in hiring would provide to American workers, businesses, and the country at large, such a practice has been illegal since 1986.25 This makes no sense. Alternative View Some conservatives believe that the government has a duty to limit its spending in order to limit how much it takes from American families. This means that when the government spends money, it must find the most econom- ical and effective way to do so. Excessive government spending will be borne by American workers and families through reduced incomes and purchasing power. There may be good reasons to require a certain percentage of American workers on federal contracts, but those decisions should be based on economy and efficiency as opposed to arbitrary quotas. Visa Fraud. American businesses that commit visa fraud and hire illegal immi- grants should not be the beneficiaries of federal spending. But a 2020 report by the Department of Labor’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) examined the depart- ment’s process for excluding employers who commit visa fraud and abuse from federal contracts and found much to be desired. l To protect the American workforce from unscrupulous immigration lawyers, employers, and labor brokers, the department must follow the recommendations of the OIG and institute more robust investigations for suspected visa fraud and speedier debarments for those found guilty. INTERNATIONAL LABOR POLICY Leveling the International Playing Field for Workers. As recent decades of intense import competition and offshoring have made clear, American workers suffer when the U.S. opens its markets to foreign nations’ minimal labor standards and exploitative conditions. While federal law already prohibits the importation of goods produced with forced labor, the prohibitions are toothless without effective means of enforcement and cover only the most basic of workers’ rights. The Trump Administration and its United States Trade Representative (USTR) took unprece- dented steps to redress the issue for workers. The U.S.–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA) contained the strongest and most far-reaching labor provisions of any free trade agreement (FTA), with protections and commitments to reduce labor abuses and raise wages. It also established new modes of enforcement. For future FTAs, the USTR should replicate the labor provisions of USMCA, especially the provisions to: — 614 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Eliminate all forms of forced or compulsory labor. l Protect workers’ rights to organize and participate voluntarily in a union without employer interference or discrimination. l Create a rapid-response mechanism to provide for an independent panel investigation of denial of labor rights at covered facilities. l Shift the burden of proof by presuming that an alleged violation affects trade and investment, unless otherwise demonstrated. For future authorizations of Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), the President should urge Congress to: l Create mechanisms for supply-chain transparency. l Institute a general prohibition on forced labor conditions. Investigate Foreign Labor Violations That Undermine American Work- ers. The United States’ embrace of globalization has exposed American workers to unfair competition from nations with cheap, abundant, and often exploited labor. American workers have, as a consequence, seen their earning power erode. While negotiating stronger trade agreements with robust labor provisions should be the primary tool with which to regulate international labor competition, the federal government can also take steps to identify the worst labor abuses and rule breakers. DOL’s Bureau of International Labor Affairs (ILAB) plays a critical role in monitor- ing and enforcing the labor provisions of U.S. trade agreements and trade preference programs as well as investigating child labor and human trafficking violations. l The next Administration should focus ILAB investigations on foreign labor violations that do the most to damage American workers’ earning power, specifically regimes that engage in child and forced labor, fail to protect workers’ organizing rights, and permit hazardous or otherwise exploitative working conditions. Alternative/Additional View. Conservatives share a belief in protecting and pro- moting American workers and their families and orienting international policies with Americans’ interests first. Some conservatives believe that the best way to put Amer- ica first is by making America more attractive. In addition to restrictions imposed on other countries, removing existing barriers to American manufacturing, employ- ment, and commerce can help American workers, entrepreneurs, and families.

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills