PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 9, 2023
Stop Higher Education Espionage and Theft Act of 2023
This bill establishes a process for designating foreign actors as foreign intelligence threats to higher education.
Specifically, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) must designate a foreign actor as a foreign intelligence threat to higher education if the foreign actor has committed, attempted to commit, or conspired to commit certain actions in connection with an institution of higher education (IHE), such as espionage, misuse of visas, or theft of trade secrets. Prior to making such a designation, the FBI must submit notice to Congress and the Department of Justice.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Upon the designation of a foreign actor as a threat, the Department of State must revoke the nonimmigrant visa issued to the foreign actor present in the United States, and the Department of Homeland Security must initiate removal proceedings against the foreign actor.
Additionally, the bill provides for judicial review and a process for revoking a foreign actor's designation as a threat.
Finally, the bill also requires an IHE to disclose to the Department of Education any gift or contract with a foreign intelligence threat, including the fair market value of the gift or contract.
People & committees
Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 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 S.360 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 S.360 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 S.360 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 S.360 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.