Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, PRIVACY NEWS: Democrats call for bipartisan approach as House Republicans build support for privacy bill, (Jun 3, 2026)

By Tom Leithauser

The SECURE Data Act would be a comprehensive federal privacy law that would preempt state laws already enacted.

A comprehensive consumer privacy bill received strong support from a panel of witnesses assembled by the Republican majority on the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s commerce, manufacturing, and trade subcommittee.

But the Securing and Establishing Consumer Uniform Rights and Enforcement over (SECURE) Data Act (HR 8413), which was the focus of the hearing, seems unlikely to become law unless the all-Republican team that supports it finds ways to bring some Democrats into the fold.

The SECURE Data Act was introduced last month by Rep. John Joyce (R., Pa.) and eight Republican co-sponsors. The bill is modeled on state-level comprehensive privacy laws but would preempt those laws in the states where they’ve been enacted.

“This legislation is built on the foundations laid by more than 20 states—red states, blue states, and purple states. The states have sketched a path forward for us that protects consumers, provides certainty for businesses, and offers a strong foundation for bipartisan federal privacy legislation,” Rep. Joyce said.

Democrats, however, noted that past efforts to enact comprehensive privacy legislation were less one-sided. “I have long supported bipartisan national comprehensive privacy legislation,” noted Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. (D., N.J.), the full committee’s ranking member.

“But previous bipartisan compromises, like the American Privacy Rights Act and the American Data Privacy and Protection Act, recognized that a federal privacy law must exceed the strongest protections of any state, not set a weak ceiling,” Rep. Pallone said.

“Rather than taking the strongest consumer protections from the existing state privacy laws, this bill is assembled from industry-friendly state privacy laws that have been pushed by Big Tech. It is, therefore, no surprise that this bill allows Big Tech and others to continue their ongoing privacy violations,” he said.

Rep. Pallone expressed hope, however, that the bill could be amended to rope in some Democratic support. “I still think we can come to a compromise similar to what we’ve done in the past,” he said.

Three of the four witnesses at the hearing offered enthusiastic support for the bill, while the witness placed on the panel by committee Democrats offered pointed criticism of the SECURE Data Act.

“America needs a strong federal data privacy law. But the SECURE Data Act is not the right approach,” Caitriona Fitzgerald, deputy director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, told the subcommittee.

“This Committee previously advanced bipartisan bills to limit data collection and protect Americans from abusive data tracking. In those negotiations, both sides worked to craft a federal bill that was stronger than the strongest state law,” Ms. Fitzgerald said in her written testimony.

“The SECURE Data Act, which came out of a one-sided process, does the opposite. It sets a weaker standard than the weakest state law as the national ceiling. It imposes sweeping preemption to strip privacy rights from millions of Americans in states with stronger protections,” she said.

The state privacy laws upon which the SECURE Data Act is based are not strong laws, Ms. Fitzgerald asserted. “Many of these state laws closely follow a model initially drafted by tech giants,” she testified. “Civil society groups, including leading consumer and privacy organizations, have long opposed these bills.”

But Kate Goodloe, managing director for the Business Software Alliance, found value in using the state privacy laws to inform a single national standard. “These laws are remarkably consistent, because 21 share the same core structure, with a common set of definitions, rights, and obligations,” she said in her written testimony. “Grounding federal privacy legislation in the structure already widely adopted across the states is a critical step.”

Similar views were offered by Tyler Bridegan, a partner at Womble Bond Dickinson and former director–privacy and technology enforcement for the Texas attorney general. “States, as laboratories of democracy, have long taken an innovative approach to privacy protections. Many of these privacy protections have withstood substantial technological advances and continue to be powerful protectors of Americans’ data,” Mr. Bridegan said in his written testimony.

Although the states’ privacy laws have provisions in common, they still present challenges to businesses that face a “patchwork” of requirements, according to Ashli Watts, president and chief executive officer of the Kentucky Chamber of Commerce, who cited the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation’s estimate that the “fragmented privacy landscape” in the U.S. could cost $1 trillion over 10 years.

“When every state writes its own law, even good policy creates a patchwork. Today, over twenty states have enacted comprehensive data privacy laws, each with its own definitions, obligations, and enforcement mechanisms. For a business operating across state lines—even a small business with an online presence—that means navigating a different set of rules in every market they touch,” Ms. Watts said in her written testimony.

“The SECURE Data Act does not ask Congress to invent something new,” she added. “It asks Congress to codify what the states have already proven works. Strong consumer privacy protections and economic growth are not competing goals. They reinforce each other. When customers trust that their information is being handled responsibly, they are more willing to engage, transact, and participate in the digital marketplace. Clear rules help build that trust.”

News: Privacy