HR-4361-119
Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
Sponsored by Eric Crawford (R-AR)
What it does
The STOP China Act (HR 4361-119) was introduced in July 2025 and referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit. Based on its title and committee referral, it would impose restrictions on Chinese entities, goods, or investment in U.S. transportation infrastructure or supply chains. The full text of the bill was not provided, so the specific mechanical provisions — such as which entities are targeted, what activities are prohibited, and how enforcement would work — cannot be determined from available information.
Who benefits
U.S. transportation infrastructure companies and domestic manufacturers that compete with Chinese firms could benefit from reduced competition. American workers in transportation-related industries may benefit if the bill displaces Chinese-made components or services with domestic alternatives. National security agencies and policymakers concerned about foreign influence in critical infrastructure would gain additional legal tools.
Who is hurt
U.S. companies that rely on lower-cost Chinese-made components for transportation projects (e.g., rail cars, buses, or road equipment) could face higher procurement costs. State and local governments that fund transportation projects may face increased costs if cheaper Chinese-sourced materials are restricted. Chinese firms currently operating in or supplying the U.S. transportation sector would lose market access. Consumers and taxpayers could indirectly bear higher costs if transportation project expenses rise.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that Chinese state-subsidized firms have penetrated U.S. transit systems — for example, CRRC Corporation has supplied rail cars to major U.S. cities — creating potential cybersecurity and national security vulnerabilities in critical infrastructure. They contend that restricting Chinese involvement protects sensitive transportation networks from foreign surveillance or sabotage and levels the playing field for domestic manufacturers who cannot compete with state-backed pricing.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that broad restrictions on Chinese transportation goods could significantly raise costs for cash-strapped transit agencies, potentially delaying or scaling back infrastructure projects that serve millions of Americans. They contend that existing procurement rules and security reviews — such as those in the National Defense Authorization Act — already address the most acute risks, and that this bill may duplicate or conflict with those frameworks without providing proportionate security benefits.
Constitutional context
Congress has broad authority to regulate foreign commerce and procurement under the Commerce Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 3) and the Necessary and Proper Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 18). If the bill delegates significant rulemaking authority to an agency, post-Loper Bright (2024) courts would independently assess whether that delegation is clearly authorized, and under West Virginia v. EPA (2022), any rules of vast economic significance would require explicit congressional authorization.
Checks and balances
Congress would gain authority to restrict foreign participation in transportation markets; executive agencies (likely DOT or DHS) would implement and enforce the restrictions, subject to post-Loper Bright independent judicial review of any agency rulemaking.
Historical precedent
The National Defense Authorization Act for FY2020 prohibited federal transit funds from being used to purchase rail cars or buses from Chinese state-owned or state-controlled companies, establishing a direct legislative precedent for this type of restriction.