Connected Vehicle Security Act of 2026

Enumerated powers · passes

The federal government has explicit authority under Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 (Commerce Clause) to regulate interstate and foreign commerce, including the importation and sale of goods. Additionally, the bill addresses national security concerns related to foreign adversaries, which falls under the federal government's foreign affairs powers. The prohibition on importation and interstate commerce of certain connected vehicles is a valid exercise of these enumerated powers.

Bill of Rights · passes

The bill does not directly infringe on any of the first ten amendments. It regulates commercial transactions involving specific foreign entities, which does not implicate speech, religion, assembly, press, petition, arms, quartering, search and seizure, self-incrimination, due process, takings, fair trial, jury, cruel and unusual punishment, unenumerated rights, or reserved powers. The prohibition on certain software and hardware components is a commercial regulation, not a restriction on individual expression or belief.

Individual liberty · passes · severity: minor

The bill restricts the importation and sale of certain connected vehicles and components, which are commercial activities. While it does limit what individuals can purchase, the government has a compelling constitutional justification: national security and the protection of U.S. infrastructure from foreign adversaries. The restriction is not on personal speech, belief, or labor but on specific products associated with designated foreign countries. The burden on individuals is minimal and justified by the compelling interest in national security.

Decentralization · raises concerns · severity: minor

The bill fails the decentralization test because it consolidates decision-making at the federal level. While an individual or family could not handle the national security aspects of this issue, and local communities or states could not effectively regulate foreign trade, the federal government is the appropriate level for regulating international commerce. However, the bill's broad definition of 'connected vehicle' and the requirement for BIS to publish an authorized list could be seen as over-centralizing decisions about what is safe, potentially preempting state and local judgments. The federal action is necessary for uniform foreign policy, but the implementation could be more deferential to state and local interests.

Due process and takings · passes · severity: minor

The bill provides for civil penalties for violations, which implies a process for enforcement. However, the bill does not explicitly outline procedural due process protections, such as notice and hearing, for those affected by the prohibition. The requirement for BIS to publish a list of authorized items by January 1, 2027, provides some clarity, but the broad definition of 'connected vehicle' could lead to arbitrary enforcement. The bill does not take property without just compensation; it restricts future transactions, not existing property rights. Overall, the bill does not violate due process, but the lack of explicit procedural safeguards is a minor concern.