U.S. courts blocked from enforcing foreign censorship judgments
H.R. 10174 — GRANITE Act · Filed by Michael Rulli (R-OH) · Introduced Aug 27, 2026 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill prohibits U.S. courts from recognizing or enforcing foreign court judgments that are based on foreign censorship laws—laws that restrict speech, target expression by content or viewpoint, or compel disclosure in ways that would violate the First Amendment if applied in the U.S. It gives U.S. persons sued under such foreign judgments the right to sue in federal court for a declaration that the foreign judgment is unenforceable, and it removes sovereign immunity as a defense for foreign states pursuing such judgments.
Why we flagged it
The bill's operative mechanism is a straightforward prohibition on U.S. court enforcement of foreign censorship judgments and a removal of sovereign immunity for foreign states pursuing such judgments. It is a defensive measure protecting U.S. persons' speech rights from foreign state coercion.
What the text implies
- Foreign states may respond by refusing to enforce U.S. judgments in their courts, creating reciprocal enforcement barriers.
- The definition of 'foreign censorship law' turns on whether it would conflict with the First Amendment—this may create litigation over comparative constitutional law and the scope of First Amendment protections.
The full analysis lists 3 implications of this text.
Who it affects
U.S. citizens and persons gain a concrete legal shield against foreign censorship judgments being enforced against them domestically, and a federal forum to challenge such judgments.