Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
This bill requires the President to make periodic determinations about Russian actions toward Ukraine and, if certain negative findings are made, mandates a wide package of economic, financial, trade, and immigration sanctions.
Measures include blocking property and visas for Russian officials and affiliates; sanctions on major Russian banks and state-owned entities; prohibitions on U.S. financial transactions, investments, energy exports to Russia, and purchases of Russian sovereign debt; a ban on Russian uranium imports; 500 percent minimum duties on goods and services from Russia (and on goods from countries trading in Russian-origin energy or uranium); and automatic CAATSA sanctions.
The President may implement measures under IEEPA, apply limited exceptions (humanitarian, intelligence, certain treaty obligations), and may terminate or reimpose sanctions upon certification or renewed violations.
Content is politically salient and partly bipartisan in intent but highly intrusive economically and operationally, reducing near‑term enactment odds absent significant narrowing.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly focused substantive sanctions statute that uses existing statutory authorities to impose an extensive, multi-domain sanctions regime and assigns responsibilities to specific agencies with concrete trigger timelines.
Lib_left emphasizes moral and geopolitical gains; conservatives emphasize execution and overreach risks.
Lib_left emphasizes moral and geopolitical gains; conservatives emphasize execution and overreach risks.
Likely supportive as a strong, enforceable package to punish aggression and protect Ukrainian sovereignty.
Will welcome measures targeting oligarchs, banks, and state revenues, but watch for humanitarian and civilian harm.
Cautiously supportive of strong measures against renewed Russian aggression, but concerned about scope, enforceability, and unintended economic consequences.
Would press for allied coordination and clear implementation plans.
Generally favorable to a robust punitive response that constrains Russian power and punishes elites.
However, some will worry about executive overreach and harms to U.S. business interests and global markets.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content is politically salient and partly bipartisan in intent but highly intrusive economically and operationally, reducing near‑term enactment odds absent significant narrowing.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Lib_left emphasizes moral and geopolitical gains; conservatives emphasize execution and overreach risks.
Content is politically salient and partly bipartisan in intent but highly intrusive economically and operationally, reducing near‑term enac…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly focused substantive sanctions statute that uses existing statutory authorities to impose an extensive, multi-domain sanctions regime and assigns responsi…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.