Gone quiet · last update Sep 30, 2026 / Democratic Party

The congressional stock trading ban and its defeat in the Senate

Overview · reviewed October 28, 2026

In July 2026 the House passed the Stop Insider Trading Act, 232-198, which would bar members of Congress and their spouses and dependent children from buying individual stocks, packaged with an unrelated voter ID measure backed by President Donald Trump.[1][2] In October it failed to reach the 60 votes needed to advance in the Senate after Democrats voted against it.[3]

Read the timeline

Follow this story to see new developments when you return.

In October it failed to reach the 60 votes needed to advance in the Senate after Democrats voted against it.[3]

Coverage over time

Share of tracked outlets · weekly (UTC)

Week of 2025-07-28 (UTC): 6%, 11 of 187 tracked outlets (2 left, 3 center, 6 right)Week of 2025-08-04 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-08-11 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-08-18 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-08-25 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-09-01 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-09-08 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-09-15 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-09-22 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-09-29 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-10-06 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-10-13 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-10-20 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-10-27 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-11-03 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-11-10 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-11-17 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-11-24 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-12-01 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-12-08 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-12-15 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-12-22 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2025-12-29 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-01-05 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-01-12 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-01-19 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-01-26 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-02-02 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-02-09 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-02-16 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-02-23 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-03-02 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-03-09 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-03-16 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-03-23 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-03-30 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-04-06 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-04-13 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-04-20 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-04-27 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-05-04 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-05-11 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-05-18 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-05-25 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-06-01 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-06-08 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-06-15 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-06-22 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-06-29 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-07-06 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-07-13 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-07-20 (UTC): 6%, 35 of 562 tracked outlets (7 left, 18 center, 10 right)Week of 2026-07-27 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-08-03 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-08-10 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-08-17 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-08-24 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-08-31 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-09-07 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-09-14 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-09-21 (UTC): under 1%, 1 of 479 tracked outlets (0 left, 0 center, 1 right)Week of 2026-09-28 (UTC): 6%, 29 of 476 tracked outlets (4 left, 14 center, 11 right)Week of 2026-10-05 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-10-12 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-10-19 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-10-26 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-11-02 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outletsWeek of 2026-11-09 (UTC): no coverage from tracked outlets, so far

LeftCenterRightLighter bar: this week so far

Each bar is the share of the outlets on our Left / Center / Right rating scale that we tracked publishing that week which carried reporting on this story, split by the outlets' ratings. We track more outlets now than in the archive, so a share keeps earlier and later weeks comparable. An outlet counts once a week however much it published, and outlets in one ownership or syndication group count as one on each side they appear on. A rating describes the outlet, not the report. A gap means no such reports were collected that week, not that nothing was reported anywhere. Weeks run Monday to Sunday in UTC, so a report published on a Sunday evening in US Eastern time counts in the next week. 2 more outlets off the scale (not rated, or outside the left-right graphs) also reported; they are not in this chart. See them.

Weekly counts, outlets and reports (4 weeks with coverage)
Outlets on the rating scale that carried this story each week, of the outlets tracked that week, newest first
Week of (UTC)LeftCenterRightOf trackedShareReceipts
Sep 28, 20264141129 of 4766%
Sep 21, 20260011 of 479under 1%
Jul 20, 20267181035 of 5626%
Jul 28, 202523611 of 1876%

Latest coverage

The newest reporting in this story's record.

  1. Sep 29, 2026 · first reported · Headline from Newsweek

    Every Senate Democrat Just Voted Against Stock Trading Ban—Here's Why

Background

Republican Sen. Josh Hawley had pushed a stock trading bill in 2025, prompting a dustup with Trump that Hawley later called a misunderstanding.[4] Some House Democrats joined Republicans in the July vote,[5] but in the Senate, where the package needed 60 votes, Democrats voted against it.[2][3] Rep. Young Kim, a California Republican, separately targeted earmark loopholes that let lawmakers enrich themselves.[6]

Supporting stories (6)
  1. House Passes Congressional Stock Trading Ban, Faces Uncertain Senate Future
  2. US House approves joint measure to curb Congress’ stock trading, require voter ID
  3. Senate Democrats Blocked a Bill Banning Congressional Stock Trading — Why Republicans Counted on That
  4. Trump Blasts Hawley Over Stock Trading Ban
  5. House votes to limit stock trading by members of Congress, elevating a campaign issue
  6. GOP takes aim at Congress' next 'get filthy rich' loophole after stock-trading ban

The full record

Each date is when an update was first reported.

All 6 recorded updates

July 2025

  1. Trump Blasts Hawley Over Stock Trading BanHeadline from The American Conservative · 11 outlets

Coverage & sources

Read the reports, see how much was collected over time, or compare outlets by political leaning.

Coverage & sources →