Values for America · Brief for congressional offices
To the office of U.S. Senator John Cornyn
Economic Espionage Adversarial Entity Designation Act of 2025
The measure, as described from the official record: To simplify the prosecution of economic espionage under 18 U.S.C. § 1831 by automatically treating any entity that is domiciled in a foreign adversary country as a 'foreign instrumentality' of that country, eliminating the need to prove a direct government connection in each case.
The proposal
Operative provisions (VFA proposal)
- funding source
- Existing Department of Justice appropriations; no new budget authority.
- funding amount
- Not required; implementation costs absorbed within current DOJ budget.
- sunset years
- 5 years
- oversight body
- House and Senate Committees on the Judiciary: receive annual reports from the Attorney General listing all designations and the evidence supporting each, to be submitted by January 31 of each year.
- enforcement mechanism
- Criminal enforcement under existing 18 U.S.C. § 1831 penalties (fines and imprisonment up to 15 years). The rebuttable presumption applies in federal courts; the DOJ retains burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt on all elements.
- effective date
- 180 days after enactment
Constitutional basis
- Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 (Commerce Clause)
- Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 (Necessary and Proper Clause)
- Fifth Amendment (Due Process Clause)
- Tenth Amendment (reserved powers)
Concerns with the measure as written:
- Fifth Amendment Due Process: An irrebuttable presumption that all entities domiciled in an adversary country are government instrumentalities may deny the entity an opportunity to prove it is independent, violating procedural due process.
- First Amendment: The overbroad definition could chill legitimate commercial and expressive activities by entities that have no connection to the foreign government.
- Tenth Amendment: If the definition inadvertently covers state-owned or state-influenced entities within the U.S. that are domiciled in adversary countries, it could intrude on state sovereignty.
- Article I, Section 8 limits: While the economic espionage statute is generally within Congress's commerce and foreign affairs powers, an arbitrary presumption without a factual nexus may exceed the Necessary and Proper Clause.
Why both sides can back it (VFA’s assessment)
Democratic priorities: preserves due process by allowing a rebuttable presumption and judicial review of designations, preventing overbroad criminal liability. Requires annual reporting to Congress for transparency. Republican priorities: strengthens national security by making it easier to prosecute economic espionage from adversary countries without requiring direct proof of government control in every case; provides a clear statutory tool for prosecutors. The balance of a rebuttable presumption and designation authority satisfies both the rule-of-law concerns of Democrats and the enforcement needs of Republicans.
Values for America is a nonpartisan, constitution-first SI think tank. This brief is informational. It is a policy proposal, not law, and it does not support or oppose any candidate or party. Full analysis and sources: https://www.valuesforamerica.com/solutions/181 · Methodology: https://www.valuesforamerica.com/methodology