President gets unilateral power to block foreign vessels from U.S. ports
H.R. 7084 — Defending American Property Abroad Act of 2026 · Filed by August Pfluger (R-TX) · 7 cosponsors · Introduced Jan 15, 2026 · Passed chamber
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 amends maritime law to allow the President to block vessels that have used ports in Western Hemisphere countries with U.S. free trade agreements from entering U.S. ports, but only if those countries have expropriated or nationalized property owned by U.S. persons. The President can designate affected ports and remove the designation once the property is restored or compensation is paid. The bill creates a tool for the executive branch to retaliate against foreign expropriation by restricting vessel access to U.S. waters.
Why we flagged it
The bill's core function is to grant the President unilateral power to designate foreign ports and block vessels using them from U.S. entry, creating a maritime sanctions tool without requiring congressional approval for each use. This is fundamentally about expanding executive authority over trade and maritime commerce.
What the text implies
- The bill grants the President sole discretion to determine what constitutes 'expropriation' or 'nationalization' without defining these terms, creating potential for political weaponization of maritime access.
- Vessels blocked from U.S. ports may be rerouted through other countries, increasing shipping costs and supply-chain delays that ultimately raise consumer prices for imported goods.
- The 'adequate and effective compensation' standard is undefined and left to presidential judgment, creating uncertainty about when designations will be lifted and potentially enabling indefinite port closures.
- The bill applies only to Western Hemisphere countries with U.S. free trade agreements, creating asymmetric leverage that may incentivize those countries to retaliate against U.S. shipping or trade interests.
- No judicial review mechanism exists; the President's designation decisions are unreviewable, eliminating a check on executive overreach in maritime commerce.
Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.
Who it affects
The bill serves a legitimate public interest—protecting U.S. property rights abroad and enforcing international law—but the mechanism grants broad executive power to restrict maritime commerce without legislative oversight, potentially raising shipping costs for consumers and creating uncertainty for legitimate trade. The lack of judicial review or clear standards for what constitutes adequate compensation creates risk of overreach.
Who stands to gain
- U.S. shipping companies (reduced competition from foreign vessels)
- U.S. port operators (potential increase in domestic vessel traffic)
- U.S. property owners with expropriated assets abroad (enforcement mechanism)
Named in the bill
President of the United States, Western Hemisphere countries with U.S. free trade agreements, U.S. persons (property owners), Maritime vessels and operators, U.S. ports and harbors, Title 46 USC (maritime law)
Where it stands
7 cosponsors: 5 Republicans, 2 Democrats.
- Jan 15, 2026 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
- Jan 15, 2026 — Referred to House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure”
- Jan 21, 2026 — Markup held in committee · Congress.gov: “Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held”
- Jan 21, 2026 — Reported out of committee · Congress.gov: “Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 36 - 22”
- Mar 27, 2026 — Passed the House · Congress.gov: “On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 247 - 164 (Roll no. 105).”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
Money around this bill
3 lobbying clients named this bill on 3 disclosure filings across 1 quarter, Jun 2026 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $17,270,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 3 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 61% of bills with at least one filing.
August Pfluger, the sponsor, reported $1,070,325 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.
- Chamber of Commerce of the U.S.A. — $16,950,000 on 1 filing
- Vulcan Materials Company — $270,000 on 1 filing
- Vulcan Materials Company — $50,000 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 (2,873 characters) on Jul 2, 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 Jun 2026 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.
“President gets unilateral power to block foreign vessels from U.S. ports” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hr7084 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.