POLISCOPE
Back to feed
FEDERALcongressional record

Senate Rejects Motion to Consider Resolution on Background Check Rules

Original title: PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL UNDER CHAPTER 8 OF TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE, OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION RELATING TO THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE RULE...

May 13, 2026

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

The Frame

What this does

The rejection of this motion means that current federal background screening rules remain in place, maintaining the status quo for how credit bureaus handle consumer data and background check accuracy.

Who is mentioned in the record

Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.

Job seekers and renters

These individuals are subject to background checks that may contain inaccurate or outdated information.

Credit bureaus

These entities are responsible for maintaining and reporting consumer background data and must comply with federal regulations.

What changed

Last recorded activity May 13, 2026.

What's next

Next step not available in the current record.

Summary

The U.S. Senate voted against a with S.J. Res. 133, a resolution that sought to overturn a Trump administration decision to withdraw CFPB guidance on background screening accuracy. The resolution aimed to reinstate stricter standards for credit bureaus to prevent errors in background reports that affect employment and housing applications.

Key Facts

  • The Senate voted to reject the motion to proceed to S.J. Res. 133.
  • S.J. Res. 133 sought to use the Congressional Review Act (Chapter 8 of Title 5) to disapprove of a rule withdrawal by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.
  • The rule in question relates to 'Fair Credit Reporting; Background Screening'.
  • The Trump administration withdrew previous CFPB guidance on background screening, citing it as too onerous.
  • The resolution was intended to address issues with inaccurate background reports affecting job seekers and housing applicants.
  • Senator Blunt Rochester stated the current unemployment rate is 4.3 percent.
  • Equifax continued to process customer complaints regarding background checks despite the federal rule withdrawal.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the purpose of S.J. Res. 133?
The resolution aimed to overturn a federal rule withdrawal that had removed specific guidance for credit bureaus regarding the accuracy of background screening reports.
Did the resolution pass?
No, the Senate rejected the to the resolution, meaning it will not be considered at this time.
How does this affect background checks?
Because the motion failed, the current federal regulations regarding background screening accuracy remain unchanged.

Why It Matters

The rejection of this motion means that current federal background screening rules remain in place, maintaining the status quo for how credit bureaus handle consumer data and background check accuracy.

News Coverage

Lobbying Activity

60 Plus Association

2026

TAXATION/INTERNAL REVENUE CODEENVIRONMENT/SUPERFUNDCOPYRIGHT/PATENT/TRADEMARKHEALTH ISSUES

Signed a coalition letter opposing any efforts to raise the corporate tax rate above the 21% level set in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA). Signed a coalition in support of the Family Business Legacy Act, H.R. 6329. This legislation creates parity in the tax code between the estate and gift taxes by allowing an estate tax deduction for contributions to 501(c)(4), (c)(5), and (c)(6) organizations. Signed a coalition letter urging opposition to proposals that would raise taxes on carried interest investment income.The letter is urging Congress to reject the misnamed Carried Interest Fairness Act, legislation recently reintroduced by Senators Tammy Baldwin, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and other progressive members of Congress. This legislation that would increase the tax rate on carried interest investment by 70%, from 23.8% to 40.8%. Signed a coalition letter in support of H.R.574 - ALIGN Act and highlight the 100% bonus depreciation provision's importance as the tax cut reauthorization efforts continue. Signed a coalition to support of repealing IRA's green new deal subsidies in reconciliation to pay for tax cuts. Signed a coalition letter regarding digital services taxes (DST) in an effort to stop Canadas imposition of a discriminatory digital services tax (DST) on U.S. firms and your efforts to include restrictions on the imposition of DSTs and other unfair digital policies in recently announced trade agreements-providing a model for future trade negotiations. Signed a coalition letter urging the President to index capital gains for inflation.

ILLINOIS ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BOARDS

$30,000

ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND POLICY CENTER

Sponsors

Discoveries

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift90% confidence

Regulatory Flip-Flop

The document highlights a cycle of policy change where guidance issued by one administration was withdrawn by the next, and is now being challenged by Congress.

Connected Entities

personLisa Blunt RochesterSenator from Delaware who introduced the motion and resolution.Map →
organizationEquifaxCited as a credit bureau that continued to handle complaints despite the rule reMap →
organizationTrump administrationThe administration that withdrew the CFPB guidance on background screening.Map →
organizationBiden administrationThe administration that originally issued the guidance on background screening.Map →
organizationBureau of Consumer Financial ProtectionThe federal agency responsible for consumer financial regulations.Map →

Sources

Open source document

www.govinfo.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance60
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy75
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment20
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz30
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record