119-HR-7085 Journalist Public Summary
A House bill would repeal the SEC’s conflict‑minerals disclosure mandate (Dodd‑Frank Section 1502 / Exchange Act §13(p)). Backers argue it’s costly, ineffective, and partly unconstitutional; human‑rights groups warn repeal would undercut supply‑chain transparency. The bill was introduced on January 15, 2026 and sent to the House Financial Services Committee. (sec.gov)
Headline Summary
Proposal to scrap the SEC’s conflict‑minerals reporting rule—best known as Dodd‑Frank Section 1502 and Exchange Act §13(p)—with supporters citing cost and limited impact, and opponents warning of a setback for supply‑chain transparency. (sec.gov)
What It Does
The bill repeals Exchange Act §13(p) and strikes Dodd‑Frank Section 1502, ending the requirement that publicly traded companies check and disclose whether tin, tantalum, tungsten, or gold in their products originated in the Democratic Republic of the Congo or neighboring countries. Parts of the original rule’s “DRC conflict‑free” labeling were struck down by the D.C. Circuit, and since 2017 the SEC has limited enforcement primarily to basic country‑of‑origin inquiries. (sec.gov)
Who’s For It
- Rep. Bill Huizenga (R‑MI), the sponsor; similar Huizenga repeal efforts previously advanced in committee. Reasoning: costs, immaterial to most investors, and outside the SEC’s core mission. (congress.gov)
- Business associations that sued over the rule (National Association of Manufacturers, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Business Roundtable), citing compelled‑speech concerns and compliance burdens. (uschamber.com)
- Supporters also point to GAO findings that disclosures have not reduced violence in eastern DRC—especially in gold—arguing the policy goal isn’t being met. (gao.gov)
Who’s Against It
- Human‑rights groups (Global Witness, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch) say the disclosures drive due‑diligence in supply chains and help keep money from armed groups; repeal would roll back transparency. (globalwitness.org)
- Some companies have publicly supported maintaining conflict‑minerals due‑diligence, arguing rules create a level playing field for responsible firms. (hrw.org)
- Opponents also note the U.S. could fall behind EU/OECD‑style responsible‑sourcing standards if the rule is repealed. (globalwitness.org)
What’s Next
Status: Introduced in the House on January 15, 2026 and referred to the Financial Services Committee. Next steps would be a committee hearing/markup, a House vote, and then Senate consideration. (congress.gov)
Discussion