PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 07 · Reported to House · Jun 18, 2026
Destruction of Hazardous Imports Act
This bill expands the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) authority to require the destruction of certain items that are refused import into the United States and pose a risk to public health.
Under current law, imported food, drugs, medical devices, tobacco products, and cosmetics are subject to FDA review. If an imported item is deficient in a specified manner (e.g., counterfeit, misbranded, or manufactured under insanitary conditions), the item is generally refused admission to the United States. An item refused admission may generally be exported, except that the FDA may destroy a drug, medical device, or tobacco product that is valued under $2,500 without the opportunity for export.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Under the bill, the FDA may order the destruction, without the opportunity for export, of any food, drug, medical device, tobacco product, or cosmetic that is refused admission if the item presents a significant public health concern. If such an order is issued, the item’s owner or consignee must destroy it within 90 days at their own cost.
The bill also prohibits the unauthorized movement (e.g., export) of an item subject to a destruction order. A violator is subject to a fine, a prison term of up to one year, or both.
The FDA must promulgate regulations to carry out these provisions. These regulations must provide for due process for the owner or consignee of an item subject to a destruction order, including notice and an opportunity to appear before the item is destroyed.
People & committees
Rep. Higgins, Clay [R-LA-3] · R–LA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H4637-4638)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H4637-4638)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2715.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4637-4639)
Mr. Guthrie moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 613.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 119-705.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 119-705.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 43 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.2715 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.2715 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.2715 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.2715 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.