- ConsumersMaintains consumer privacy protections restricting access to consumer reports.
- ConsumersPreserves standards intended to limit improper sharing and misuse of consumer report data.
- ConsumersProvides regulatory certainty for consumers and advocates by keeping the 2022 rule in effect.
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to the withdrawal of the rule…
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
This joint resolution, under the Congressional Review Act (chapter 8 of title 5), disapproves the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection's rule that withdrew the 2022 CFPB rule titled “Fair Credit Reporting; Permissible Purposes for Furnishing, Using, and Obtaining Consumer Reports.” If enacted, the withdrawal (90 Fed.
Reg. 20084 (May 12, 2025)) would be nullified and have no force or effect, leaving the 2022 rule (87 Fed.
Reg. 41243 (July 12, 2022)) in place.
Narrow CRA approach improves prospects versus broad reforms, but partisan alignment, Senate procedure, and executive signature/veto concerns lower chances.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise CRA-style joint resolution that clearly identifies and effects congressional disapproval of a single specified Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection rule. It states the legal outcome (the rule shall have no force or effect) with the specificity expected for this instrument.
Progressives emphasize consumer privacy and protections.
Who stands to gain, and who may push back.
- ConsumersMaintains compliance costs for businesses that rely on broader consumer report access.
- Targeted stakeholdersCould impede legitimate uses like credit underwriting, employment checks, or fraud prevention.
- Targeted stakeholdersRestricts CFPB's regulatory flexibility to update or rescind rules to changing markets.
Why the argument around this bill splits.
Progressives emphasize consumer privacy and protections.
Likely supportive because the resolution blocks a CFPB action that removed a consumer-protection rule.
They would view keeping the 2022 rule as protecting consumer privacy and limiting unjustified access to consumer reports.
Cautiously favorable if the 2022 rule's benefits justify compliance costs.
They want clearer cost-benefit analysis and prefer technical fixes over partisan use of CRA.
Likely opposed because the resolution blocks an agency rollback of a regulation, preserving what they may view as an overbroad or burdensome CFPB rule.
They prefer agency flexibility and less federal regulatory constraint on businesses.
The path through Congress.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow CRA approach improves prospects versus broad reforms, but partisan alignment, Senate procedure, and executive signature/veto concerns lower chances.
- Senate procedural hurdles and potential extended debate
- Executive branch signing or veto decision
Recent votes on the bill.
No vote history yet
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Go deeper than the headline read.
Progressives emphasize consumer privacy and protections.
Narrow CRA approach improves prospects versus broad reforms, but partisan alignment, Senate procedure, and executive signature/veto concern…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise CRA-style joint resolution that clearly identifies and effects congressional disapproval of a single specified Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection ru…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.