H.R. 9687 explained  ·  119th Congress  ·  Pending in Congress

Blocking CCP Spy Tech Act of 2026

Create a free account or sign in to follow H.R. 9687 and get alerts. Policy area: Armed Forces and National Security Create a free account or sign in to follow the Armed Forces and National Security policy area and get alerts. ▲ 98 days since action Sponsor: Scott Perry, PA-10, R → Congress.gov

Cosponsors: none · per Congress.gov, 2026-10-08

Introduced: 2026-07-14

Latest action (2026-07-14): Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, 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.

What H.R. 9687 does, in plain terms

The Congressional Research Service has not published a summary of H.R. 9687 yet. Its official title: “Blocking CCP Spy Tech Act of 2026”.

Constitution Index

“VFA Constitution grade”

Not graded yet

H.R. 9687 has not been graded yet. New measures with an official summary are graded daily under the published rubric.

The Framers

“Founders’ Verdict”

CONDITIONAL

Confidence 0.70

Archived SI output (machine-generated)

No editorial review recorded. This historical SI verdict was machine-generated by software and predates the review desk; check it against the official bill text.

Synthesis

While a majority (3 of 4) finds the core bill constitutional under Congress's enumerated powers to regulate foreign commerce and provide for the common defense, the overall verdict is CONDITIONAL due to the critical reservations of one voice (Jefferson) and overlapping concerns from others regarding potential violations of First and Fourth Amendment rights, excessive delegation, and insufficient safeguards. The bill is constitutional only if implemented with strict safeguards against warrantless surveillance, prior restraints on speech, and vague definitions of 'national security risk.'

Hamilton YES

This bill is a constitutional exercise of Congress's power to regulate foreign commerce and provide for the common defense. The review of communications equipment from foreign entities directly implicates national security, a core federal responsibility. Under Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, Congress may regulate commerce with foreign nations, and under the Necessary and Proper Clause (Clause 18), it may enact laws to carry into execution its enumerated powers. The assessment of national security risks from such equipment is a proper means to protect the Union. As argued in Federalist No. 23, …

Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 Federalist No. 23
Jefferson CONDITIONAL

The Constitution grants Congress the power to provide for the common defense, but any review of communications equipment must be strictly limited to matters of national security and must not infringe upon the freedom of speech or the press, nor upon the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. The bill is constitutional only if it does not authorize warrantless surveillance, does not impose prior restraints on speech or publication, and does not delegate to the executive branch an unchecked power to ban or restri…

Amendment I Amendment IV Amendment X Article I, Section 8, Clause 1
Madison YES

This bill, requiring a review of national security risks posed by communications equipment from certain foreign entities, is a proper exercise of Congress's enumerated powers. The power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, as vested in Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, clearly extends to the review of imported communications equipment that may affect national security. Additionally, the power to provide for the common defense, as stated in Article I, Section 8, Clause 1, authorizes Congress to assess threats to national security. The Necessary and Proper Clause (Article I, Section 8, Claus…

Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 Federalist No. 41 Federalist No. 45
Marshall YES

The Constitution vests in Congress the power to provide for the common defense and to regulate commerce with foreign nations. The bill's requirement to review national security risks posed by foreign communications equipment falls squarely within these enumerated powers. Under McCulloch v. Maryland, Congress may employ all means which are appropriate and plainly adapted to a legitimate end. Here, the review is a necessary and proper means to protect national security and regulate foreign commerce. The bill does not exceed the limits of federal authority, as it does not commandeer state governm…

Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 (Power to provide for the common defense) Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 (Commerce with foreign nations) McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) (necessary and proper means to carry out enumerated powers)
Report an error in this Founders' Verdict
No account needed. Or email hello@valuesforamerica.com. How reports are handled.

What should pass

“VFA SI Solution”

No solution yet

A sourced SI draft appears here once it passes automated checks (Constitution citation, source verification, independent SI critic). How publication works.

Share card

1200×675 PNG for X, Threads, LinkedIn and messages. Free to share with a link back to this page.

For journalists and bloggers

“Embed this grade”

Free to use with the link back. The badge and card update when the grade changes. Embed terms →

VFA Constitution grade for H.R. 9687

← Back to the Republic