hold on there's just too much going on in Congress lmao...
Congress rejects a CFPB decision regarding consumer data protection.
Sen. Rosen (D-NV) introduced this joint resolution.
In committee, no Senate vote yet.
This resolution uses the Congressional Review Act to overturn a recent action by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB). Specifically, it aims to reverse the CFPB's decision to withdraw a previous rule (Circular 2022-04) that dealt with protecting sensitive consumer information. Senator Rosen, a Democrat from Nevada, introduced this bill. It is currently awaiting consideration in the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee.
Introduced Apr 13, 2026
This resolution was introduced in the Senate by Senator Rosen on April 13, 2026, and referred to the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. For it to become law, it would need to pass both the Senate and the House of Representatives, and then be signed by the President (or if vetoed, have the veto overridden by two-thirds vote in both chambers).
If this resolution passes, the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection's (CFPB) previous guidance, Circular 2022-04, which addressed insufficient data protection for sensitive consumer information, would effectively be reinstated. This means financial institutions could be held to a higher standard for safeguarding your personal financial details. The bill aims to reverse the CFPB's decision to remove that specific guidance.
Supporters Say
Supporters believe this resolution will restore important consumer data protection rules for financial information.
Critics Say
Critics might argue that overturning the CFPB's withdrawal could impose unnecessary burdens on financial institutions.
Those in favor of this resolution likely want to ensure that financial institutions maintain robust security measures for sensitive consumer information, arguing that the original CFPB circular provided necessary guidance. Opponents might contend that the CFPB's decision to withdraw the circular was appropriate, perhaps due to it being redundant, overly broad, or creating undue compliance costs for businesses, and that Congress should not intervene in agency decisions this way.