hold on there's just too much going on in Congress lmao...
Bans selling research patents to specific foreign governments.
Rep. Nehls (R-TX) and Rep. Gill (R-TX), House Education and Workforce Committee.
Introduced in House, referred to committee, no vote yet.
The bill targets research from U.S. universities and their faculty/staff/students. It prohibits any contract giving intellectual property rights (patents, copyrights, trade secrets) to covered foreign governments: Russia, China, Iran, nations at war with the U.S., state sponsors of terrorism, or countries the Secretary of State deems a national security threat. Sponsor Rep. Nehls sits on the Transportation Committee; the bill was referred to Education and Workforce. Committee markup has not been scheduled, meaning it's in early stages.
Introduced Feb 11, 2026
This bill is under review by a committee. The committee holds hearings, gathers testimony from experts and stakeholders, and may propose amendments. If the committee votes to advance it, the bill moves to the full chamber for debate and a vote.
This directly affects university tech transfer offices that frequently license inventions to foreign entities. For example, a university patent for a new battery technology could not be sold to a Chinese state-owned company. Penalties are steep: up to $500,000 per violation for non-national security cases, and up to $5 million for research tied to energy or defense, plus any money from the deal is seized. The Secretary of State has sole authority to list additional nations or decide if research endangers national security, and those decisions are final with limited judicial review.
Supporters Say
Supporters say it protects American innovation and national security by preventing adversaries from stealing taxpayer-funded research.
Critics Say
Critics argue it gives the Secretary of State unchecked power, could harm international research collaboration, and may violate free speech or academic freedom.
Supporters, including national security hawks, point to concerns about theft of U.S. intellectual property by China and Russia. They argue universities need clear legal guardrails. Critics, including free market advocates and some academic groups, worry the broad definition of 'covered research' could include basic science, and the ban on judicial review strips courts of the ability to check executive overreach. Some also note the bill does not exempt existing collaborations, potentially disrupting ongoing projects.