Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
The bill requires the Office of Management and Budget, in consultation with several agencies, to issue standards within 60 days directing executive agencies to remove the DeepSeek application (and successors provided by High Flyer or entities it owns) from agency information technology. It defines covered application, executive agency, and information technology, and creates exceptions for law enforcement, national security activities, and security researchers, with required documented risk mitigation for authorized uses.
Liberals emphasize privacy gains and want stronger oversight
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is an administrative/operational directive that establishes a specific prohibition and tasks OMB with producing standards within a short statutory timeframe; it supplies essential definitions and identifies consulting entities but leaves important implementation, resourcing, and accountability details unspecified.
The bill requires the Office of Management and Budget, in consultation with several agencies, to issue standards within 60 days directing executive agencies to remove the DeepSeek application (and successors provided by High Flyer or entities it owns) from agency information technology.
It defines covered application, executive agency, and information technology, and creates exceptions for law enforcement, national security activities, and security researchers, with required documented risk mitigation for authorized uses.
Low fiscal cost and national-security framing aid enactment, but naming a single private company and potential legal or political pushback reduce likelihood.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is an administrative/operational directive that establishes a specific prohibition and tasks OMB with producing standards within a short statutory timeframe; it supplies essential definitions and identifies consulting entities but leaves important implementation, resourcing, and accountability details unspecified.
Liberals emphasize privacy gains and want stronger oversight
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize privacy gains and want stronger oversight
Likely supportive as a targeted federal step to reduce potential data exposure and protect privacy on government devices.
Would welcome the national security and researcher exceptions but press for transparency, oversight, and broader vendor restrictions or auditing requirements.
Generally supportive of a narrowly tailored security measure but cautious about evidence and implementation details.
Will look for clear risk assessments, defined enforcement, and limited costs to agencies before fully backing the measure.
Mixed to skeptical: may agree on national-security-driven bans but worry about federal overreach and singling out a private company without public justification.
Concerned about precedent for banning specific commercial apps and potential limits on individual choice by the state.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Low fiscal cost and national-security framing aid enactment, but naming a single private company and potential legal or political pushback reduce likelihood.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize privacy gains and want stronger oversight
Low fiscal cost and national-security framing aid enactment, but naming a single private company and potential legal or political pushback…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is an administrative/operational directive that establishes a specific prohibition and tasks OMB with producing standards within a short statutory timeframe; it suppl…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.