Analyses / Public Summary / 119 · HJRES 179 Public Summary

119-HJRES-179 Journalist Public Summary

119 · HJRES 179 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 relating to "Consumer Financial Protection Circular 2022-04: Insufficient Data Protection or Security for Sensitive Consumer Information".

account_balance_wallet Finance and Financial Sector

A House resolution would use the Congressional Review Act to overturn the CFPB’s May 12, 2025 withdrawal of guidance that said inadequate data security can be an unlawful “unfair” practice, effectively keeping that guidance in place. (govinfo.gov)

Analyzed as
Journalist
Published
08 May 2026
Updated
08 May 2026
Tags
Public Bill Summary · Congressional Review Act · CFPB
Unvetted
01 · Section

Public Summary

Headline Summary: Congress is weighing a measure to reverse the CFPB’s 2025 rollback of data‑security guidance so that the Bureau can keep treating weak protection of sensitive consumer information as an illegal "unfair" practice. (govinfo.gov)

What It Does: H.J.Res. 179 would nullify the CFPB’s May 12, 2025 rule that withdrew dozens of guidance documents—including Circular 2022‑04, which explained that insufficient data protection can violate federal consumer‑financial law—and, under the Congressional Review Act, prevent the agency from issuing a substantially similar withdrawal. In plain terms, it aims to keep (or restore) that data‑security guidance in effect. (govinfo.gov)

Why It Matters: The resolution would signal Congress’s stance on whether CFPB may rely on its 2022 data‑security guidance when supervising or enforcing against banks, lenders, and fintechs after the 2025 pullback. Supporters say this protects consumers in an era of frequent breaches; critics say guidance like this functions as regulation without the notice‑and‑comment safeguards. (consumerfinance.gov)

Who’s For It:

  • House Democrats led by Ranking Member Maxine Waters, who has opposed recent CFPB rollbacks, arguing they weaken consumer protections. (democrats-financialservices.house.gov)
  • Consumer‑protection advocates (e.g., NCLC) who view the 2025 mass withdrawal as harmful and favor keeping guidance that helps enforcers and courts identify unfair practices. (library.nclc.org)

Who’s Against It:

  • Industry groups that supported the CFPB’s 2025 withdrawal, saying sub‑regulatory guidance can act like binding rules without due process and should be replaced by formal rulemaking. (americascreditunions.org)

What’s Next: As of May 7, 2026, the resolution has been introduced and referred to the House Financial Services Committee. If advanced, it would need passage by both chambers and the President’s signature (or a veto override) to take effect. (Standard CRA process.) (congress.gov)

Discussion