PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 27, 2017
Trade Protection Not Troll Protection Act
This bill amends the Tariff Act of 1930, with respect to unfair practices in the import trade, to consider an industry in the United States to exist if there is in the United States substantial investment in licensing activities that leads to the adoption and development of articles that incorporate the patent, copyright, trademark, mask work, or design.
If the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), at the beginning of an investigation of an alleged unfair practice, identifies a domestic industry as the dispositive issue in question, it shall direct the assigned administrative law judge (ALJ) to:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
expedite fact finding on the domestic industry requirement, and
issue an initial determination on this matter within 100 days after the investigation begins.
Any initial determination by the assigned ALJ shall stay the investigation pending ITC action.
The ITC may determine during an investigation that exclusion of the articles concerned from entry into the United States would not be in the public interest, and terminate the investigation, in whole or in part, without any further determination, after considering the nature of the articles concerned and the effect of exclusion upon:
the public health and welfare,
the U.S. economy (including competitive conditions),
the production of like or directly competitive articles by the complainant and its licensees, and
U.S. consumers.
Any person adversely affected by an ITC ruling that identifies a domestic industry as the dispositive issue in question may appeal that ruling, within 60 days after all administrative remedies are exhausted, to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
ITC discretion not to exclude any articles concerned, even though an importer has violated the ban on unfair competition, is repealed. If the ITC also determines that exclusion would be in the public interest, it shall direct exclusion of the articles.
During an investigation, if the ITC determines there is reason to believe that an unfair import practice has occurred, and exclusion of the articles concerned would be in the public interest, the ITC may direct the exclusion the articles concerned, after considering the factors mentioned above. (Currently the ITC may not direct an exclusion until an investigation concludes and it determines, as a result of the investigation, that an unfair import trade practice has occurred.)
People & committees
Rep. Cárdenas, Tony [D-CA-29] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 11, 2025. 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.2189 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.2189 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.2189 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.2189 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.