{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["https://hankjohnson.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congressman-johnson-delivers-keynote-speech-innovation-alliance", "Congressman Johnson Delivers Keynote Speech for the Innovation Alliance", "2026-05-11", "2026", "2026-05", "Democrat", "House", "GA", "Henry C. \"Hank\" Johnson, Jr.", "J000288", "hankjohnson.house.gov", "hankjohnson", "https://hankjohnson.house.gov/media-center/press-releases", "scraper", "Ranking Member Johnson\n\nHouse Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, Artificial Intelligence, and the Internet\n\nKeynote Speech for the Innovation Alliance\n\nMay 11, 2026\n\nThank you for that introduction and thank you for inviting me here to speak with all of you today. Patent and innovation policy is often viewed by people not in the business of inventing as an esoteric area of the law, meant more for corporations than everyday people like you and me. But America\u2019s founders meant for patents to be for the people\u2014not giants. They believed that by rewarding any individual who can meet the standard for a patent, all of us would thrive. But reputations like patent\u2019s \u201csport of kings\u201d can be difficult to overcome. And it\u2019s been made worse by two decades of system change that have made it harder to own and enforce a patent.\n\nI\u2019m here today to say it\u2019s time to make the patent system work for the people again.\n\nOne of the reasons America\u2019s economy became the envy of the world is not just because we have smart people here. It\u2019s because we have a system to allow those people to make a living by coming up with new and better ideas. Innovators with the confidence to invest in themselves know that a novel idea can change not just the world but the course of their own life.\n\nBut it\u2019s not always so easy. Anyone who works with innovators and inventors can tell you that unpredictability is the hallmark of innovation. Patents are granted to creations that are, among a few other requirements, new. To invent, we need to do something that has never been done before. Individuals need the resources, investment, and most of all the promise that if they are able to discover something new, they can own their idea, without someone stealing it.\n\nYes, nothing is stopping inventors from getting to work inventing. But to make those innovations and discoveries worth the time, energy, and money needed to obtain a patent, the resulting patent needs to be more than a piece of paper they can hang on their wall. A patent should be reliable enough for an inventor to be able to convince investors to help transform the idea into a reality\u2014from paper to products on the shelves.\n\nTwo decades of changes that included multiple Supreme Court decisions, landscape-shifting statutory amendments, and technology evolving faster than most experts can keep up, have made for opaque rules governing enforcement of patent rights. Even once an innovator owns their patent, it can be difficult to know that it won\u2019t be taken away if and when a bigger fish infringes on it. That is why I\u2019m a proud cosponsor of the Restore Act, which would bring preliminary injunctions back to patent litigation. It is not the only fix we need, and certainly not the largest, but it is a positive step in the right direction.\n\nBut innovation isn\u2019t just about enforcement; the strength of the patent office affects the strength of individual inventors\u2019 patents too. Let me explain: Under the Trump administration, the patent office\u2019s workplace morale has plummeted, likely because of the administration\u2019s layoffs, which were bizarrely characterized as an attempt to save money, even though the USPTO is self-funded. USPTO employees\u2019 collective bargaining rights were undermined by President Trump, destabilizing the already fragile work force. And the USPTO has limited the number of hours that examiners can be compensated for working on an application.\n\nIf these changes sound to you like internal strife unrelated to patent law, you should look closer. Patent examiners, employees who work on international innovation issues, and coordinators who do outreach to underserved communities directly affect the strength of patents granted, the enforceability of those patents overseas, and the pool of innovators working on the next big idea.\n\nThis lost mission is most obvious in the USPTO\u2019s cancellation of its planned Southeast Regional Outreach Office in Atlanta, Georgia. The USPTO chose Atlanta after a long process, as proscribed under the law. Instead of going forward, the Trump Administration cancelled this outreach to the Silicon Valley of the South and instead opened it within the USPTO headquarters already in Alexandria, Virginia. Yes, this contract was near and dear to my heart, but it also would have served an innovation hub in the United States, to foster more individual inventors, decentralized from Washington, D.C. and the President.\n\nAmerican innovation can thrive only when the opportunity to participate is accessible to all. By placing the Southeast Office at USPTO headquarters just outside of DC, the USPTO has limited its reach and concentrated opportunity among those already best positioned to access it.\n\nAs you can see, I strongly disagree with the Trump Administration, and I dislike what they\u2019ve done to the USPTO. But I acknowledge the effort Director Squires has made to reform the patent trial and appeals board, which reflects ideas my Subcommittee examined when I was Chair, and which has similarities to those proposed in my colleague Congresswoman Ross\u2019s PREVAIL Act legislation. Even then, while these administrative changes are certainly worth discussion, agency action is not the same as legislation.\n\nWhen the Director changes, so can agency rules. Patents exist to ensure that research and development rests on firm, predictable ground. This kind of vacillation between presidential administrations undermines the stability that is essential to a functioning patent system. Ultimately, these are questions for Congress to decide, not the agency; and they are questions I look forward to addressing if I become Chairman of this subcommittee next Congress.\n\nA healthy USPTO requires clear rules, consistent leadership free from political influence and a steadfast commitment to protecting those who take the risk to create. It is incumbent upon us to get these questions right because inventors and job creators are not asking for favors, they are asking for a predictable and stable system they can rely on. When policy shifts with the political whims of an administration, it is the individuals in the American innovation system who pay the price.\n\nI applaud everyone in this room for their commitment to creating a patent system that works for everyone, and I welcome your questions.", 1, "2026-06-27T21:44:12Z", "2026-06-27T22:21:02Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["https://hankjohnson.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congressman-johnson-delivers-keynote-speech-innovation-alliance"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 1.1785048991441727, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}