Congress mandates detailed terrorist-content reports from Big Tech—with $5M daily penalties
H.R. 5681 — STOP HATE Act of 2025 · Filed by Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) · 1 cosponsor · Introduced Oct 3, 2025 · 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 requires large social media companies (those with 25+ million US monthly users) to publicly post their terms of service regarding terrorist content and to submit detailed reports to the Attorney General every three months on how they enforce those policies against designated terrorist organizations and individuals. The reports must include data on flagged content, removals, appeals, and trends. Companies that fail to comply face civil penalties up to $5 million per day per violation.
Why we flagged it
The bill's core mechanism is a mandatory disclosure and reporting regime for social media platforms' enforcement of policies against designated terrorist organizations. It is framed as counterterrorism but functions primarily as a transparency and compliance-reporting statute.
What the text implies
- The bill defines 'terrorist content' by reference to Executive Order 13224 designations, which are executive determinations not subject to judicial review. Platforms must report on enforcement against these designations, potentially creating pressure to over-enforce against borderline content to avoid penalties.
- Triannual reporting to the Attorney General creates a new federal surveillance mechanism over platform moderation decisions. While reports are published, the Attorney General gains detailed visibility into platform enforcement patterns that could inform future enforcement actions or policy pressure.
- The $5 million per-day penalty structure (up to $1.825 billion annually per company) creates extreme compliance pressure. Platforms may respond by automating removal of content related to designated entities, potentially catching legitimate speech, journalism, or academic discussion.
- The bill requires platforms to publish 'contact information for questions about terms of service' but does not specify what platforms must do with those inquiries, creating a potential liability exposure if platforms cannot respond adequately to millions of users.
- Sunset clause (5 years) suggests this is a pilot program, but the reporting infrastructure and compliance costs will likely persist even if the statute expires, as platforms will have built systems to track this data.
Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.
Who it affects
The bill creates transparency about how platforms handle terrorist content, which serves the public interest in understanding platform governance and counterterrorism efforts. However, the reporting requirements are extensive and may impose significant compliance costs that platforms could pass to users, and the vague definition of 'terrorist content' enforcement could create pressure for over-removal of legitimate speech without clear judicial oversight.
Who stands to gain
- compliance software vendors
- content moderation service providers
- legal and consulting firms advising platforms on reporting
Named in the bill
Social media companies (25M+ US monthly users), Attorney General, Director of National Intelligence, Comptroller General, Federal Trade Commission, Department of Justice, Foreign terrorist organizations (FTO), Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGT), Executive Order 13224
Where it stands
1 cosponsor: 1 Republicans.
- Oct 3, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
- Oct 3, 2025 — Referred to House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and House Committee on Energy and Commerce · Congress.gov: “Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent…”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
Money around this bill
2 lobbying clients named this bill on 3 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $650,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 48 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.
More lobbying clients named this bill than 41% of bills with at least one filing.
Josh Gottheimer, the sponsor, reported $1,000,800 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.
- Anti-defamation League — $590,000 on 2 filings
- Hadassah, the Women's Zionist Organization of America, Inc. — $60,000 on 1 filing
Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.
How this was measured
Analysis — Quorum's AI read the bill text published by Congress.gov (8,638 characters) on Aug 21, 2026. Section numbers in the findings refer to that text, linked below; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 16,222 analysed bills.
Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.
Money — Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act filings whose specific-issue field names this bill for quarters ending Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. A filing's amount is reported whole beside the median number of bills a filing names; it is never divided across them. PAC receipts are FEC-reported contributions to the sponsor's candidate committee in the 2026 cycle.
As of — lobbying records through Jul 20, 2026 · page rendered 2026-10-20.
“Congress mandates detailed terrorist-content reports from Big Tech—with $5M daily penalties” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hr5681 Report an error
The week in bills
One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.
One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.