PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Langworthy, Nicholas A. [R-NY-23] · R–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Sep 19, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1421 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1421 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1421 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1421 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-02-18 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed Make American Flags in America Act of 2025 would require federal agencies to use U.S.-made American flags when displaying them on federal property or buying them with agency funds. The flags and their materials would have to be entirely domestically made. Private actors’ purchases and displays would be excluded. The bill would also require a study of enforcement of labels stating where American flags were made.
This Act may be cited as the Make American Flags in America Act of 2025.
A Federal agency may not display a flag of the United States on Federal property unless such flag has been made in the United States.
Funds appropriated or otherwise made available to a Federal agency may not be used for the procurement of a flag of the United States unless such flag has been made in the United States.
The term made in the United States means 100 percent manufactured in the United States from articles, materials, or supplies that have been 100 percent produced or manufactured in the United States.
Nothing in this section may be construed to apply to the display or procurement of a flag of the United States by a private actor.
The Chair of the Federal Trade Commission shall conduct a study that— (1) assesses and describes the enforcement scheme for country-of-origin labeling for flags of the United States;
Section 2 would add a new section 11 to title 4 of the United States Code. It would prohibit covered agencies from displaying American flags on federal property unless the flags meet the domestic-production requirement, and from using agency funds to acquire flags that do not meet it.
Chapter 1 of title 4, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: 11. Display on Federal property; procurement by Federal agencies
(a) Display on Federal property A Federal agency may not display a flag of the United States on Federal property unless such flag has been made in the United States. (b) Procurement by Federal agencies Funds appropriated or otherwise made available to a Federal agency may not be used for the procurement of a flag of the United States unless such flag has been made in the United States.
A qualifying flag would have to be entirely manufactured in the United States using articles, materials, or supplies entirely produced or manufactured there. For this requirement, the United States would include the states, District of Columbia, Tribal lands, and U.S. territories or possessions.
(3) Made in the United States The term made in the United States means 100 percent manufactured in the United States from articles, materials, or supplies that have been 100 percent produced or manufactured in the United States. (4) United States The term United States, when used in a geographic sense, includes each of the several States, the District of Columbia, Tribal lands, and the territories or possessions of the United States.
The proposed requirements would cover executive agencies, military departments, legislative and judicial branch offices and agencies, the District of Columbia government, and government-controlled corporations.
(1) Federal agency The term Federal agency means— (A) an Executive agency; (B) a military department; (C) an office, agency, or other establishment in the legislative branch; (D) an office, agency, or other establishment in the judicial branch; (E) the Government of the District of Columbia; and (F) Government controlled corporations.
The display rule would cover land and buildings owned, leased, or occupied by a covered agency or an entity wholly owned by the United States.
(2) Federal property The term Federal property means real property owned, leased, or occupied by a Federal agency or an instrumentality wholly owned by the United States.
A Federal agency may not display a flag of the United States on Federal property unless such flag has been made in the United States.
The display and purchasing requirements would have to be applied consistently with U.S. obligations under international agreements. They would not apply to private actors’ displays or purchases of American flags.
(c) International agreements This section shall be applied in a manner consistent with the obligations of the United States under international agreements. (d) Rule of construction Nothing in this section may be construed to apply to the display or procurement of a flag of the United States by a private actor.
If enacted, the purchasing requirement would begin 90 days after enactment. The display requirement would begin two years after enactment.
(c) Applicability Section 11 of title 4, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply— (1) with respect to the display of a flag of the United States by a Federal agency, on and after the date that is 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act; and (2) with respect to the procurement of a flag of the United States by a Federal agency, on and after the date that is 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.
Section 3 would require the Federal Trade Commission chair to study enforcement of American flag labels identifying the country of manufacture. The study would assess the enforcement system, count fines or penalties imposed, if any, and identify the percentage of violations committed by entities previously found to have violated that system.
(a) Study The Chair of the Federal Trade Commission shall conduct a study that— (1) assesses and describes the enforcement scheme for country-of-origin labeling for flags of the United States; (2) determines how many fines or penalties, if any, have been imposed for violations of such enforcement scheme; and (3) identifies the percentage of violations of such enforcement scheme that are subsequent violations committed by an entity that has previously been found to have violated such scheme.
Within one year after enactment, the Federal Trade Commission chair would have to send the study results to the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee. The report would also include any recommendations to improve enforcement and discourage violations.
(b) Report Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Chair of the Federal Trade Commission shall submit to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report containing— (1) the results of the study conducted under subsection (a); and (2) any recommendations to improve— (A) the enforcement scheme for country-of-origin labeling for flags of the United States; and (B) the deterrent effect of such scheme.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated September 19, 2026, records introduction in the House on February 18, 2025, and referral that day to the Judiciary and Energy and Commerce Committees for provisions within their respective jurisdictions.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-19T23:28:52Z.
2025-02-18: Introduced in House
2025-02-18: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-18. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the supplied complete introduced text. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for a particular recipient or place was identified in the supplied complete introduced text. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials or resolve any separate formal earmark classification.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential exception was identified in the supplied complete introduced text. The general domestic-production requirement and broad scope exclusions do not alone warrant a targeted-benefit finding. This conclusion is limited to this version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 19, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI