On a cold January afternoon, a filing quietly appeared in the House’s public disclosure system. It wasn’t ostentatious. Ethics watchdogs review a Periodic Transaction Report every day. However, concealed therein were 210 stock transactions that had not been reported within the 45-day period mandated by law. Julia Letlow was the name at the top.
One hundred of those 210 exchanges were revealed almost a year after the fact. The deals had values ranging from $225,000 to over $3 million. That statistic came with a thump in Washington, where openness laws are meant to reassure the public.
| Category | Details |
|---|---|
| Lawmaker | Julia Letlow |
| Governing Law | STOCK Act (2012) |
| Filing Type | Periodic Transaction Report (Filed Jan. 13, 2026) |
| Committee Assignments | House Appropriations; Education & the Workforce |
| Reported Late Trades | 210 transactions (100 over a year late) |
| Reference |
Members of Congress have 45 days to record individual stock trades under the 2012 STOCK Act. The purpose of the measure was to allay public fears that parliamentarians may exploit confidential information for their own benefit. It did not completely forbid dealing in stocks. It just needed to be disclosed quickly. Letlow failed to meet that condition in several cases, according to her report, which was filed on January 13, 2026.
Matt Smith, her spokeswoman, did not contest the late filings. Rather, he cited Merrill Lynch, claiming that a third-party company with discretionary control over her account carried out the deals on its own. He said that Letlow had no prior knowledge of the transactions and neither directed nor approved them.
It’s possible that explanation satisfies some voters. Managed accounts are prevalent among public figures wanting to remove themselves from day-to-day choices. However, detractors contend that members cannot outsource accountability under the STOCK Act.
To put it simply, the member, not the broker, is responsible for reporting, according to former Democratic congressman Brian Baird, who supported the original law. He said that it is impossible to assert control over national security and tax policy while denying responsibility for financial disclosures. The dispute currently revolves around this conflict between accountability and delegation.
Letlow is a candidate in the Republican primary for the U.S. Senate seat that is now occupied by Bill Cassidy. Letlow represents Louisiana’s 5th Congressional District. The stock trades have turned into political fodder in Baton Rouge and the parishes that stretch to the Arkansas border.
The late filings have already been the subject of radio and television advertisements by a pro-Cassidy super PAC. It’s an accusatory tone. Letlow, for her part, has linked Cassidy’s previous vote to impeach former President Donald Trump to the attacks, framing them as politically motivated. It’s difficult to ignore how disclosure issues, which were formerly specialized ethics discussions, are now directly tied to political campaigns as you watch this play out.
The specific trades have also raised eyebrows. For instance, the House Appropriations Committee discussed and passed budgets pertaining to international finance and national security in July 2025. Letlow traded 16 stocks in two days, including Visa, Taiwan Semiconductor, Boeing, and Goldman Sachs.
According to her staff, she did not directly approve of the trades. However, given her access to information as a member of Appropriations and Education & the Workforce, the timing begs for investigation.
According to Kedric Payne of the Campaign Legal Center, public trust depends on prompt disclosure. He asserts that the public must have faith that personal portfolios have no bearing on legislative decisions. Credibility might be damaged even by the appearance of dispute.
This is part of a larger context. For years, the public has been pushing for a complete prohibition on congressional stock trading. Although others argue it falls short, Speaker Mike Johnson has backed legislation that would forbid MPs from purchasing individual stocks.
Both Republicans and Democrats support a total prohibition. Although his wife made 15 trades in 2018 that were occasionally published after the fact, Cassidy’s own declarations indicate that he has not traded any personal stocks since 2012. That is an isolated incident, according to his team.
According to Letlow, she is in favor of the Stock Insider Trading Act. Additionally, according to her office, she self-reported the infractions to the House Ethics Committee and engaged the legal firm Dickinson Wright to examine her disclosures. The committee decided to forego the usual $200 late filing fee at the beginning of February.
That penalties, which is small by any measure, brings to light yet another issue with the STOCK Act. Although it has disclosure requirements, there aren’t many severe consequences for breaking them. In many cases, the real deterrent is public exposure rather than financial punishment.
It’s still unclear how voters will ultimately weigh this issue. Some might perceive mistakes made by the bureaucracy instead of wrongdoing. 210 late trades can be seen by some as a sign that the system is too at ease with hazy boundaries.
Politics hardly ever pauses the stock market itself. Alcoa, Apple, Amazon, AT&T — the companies Letlow traded — continue their daily fluctuations regardless of campaign ads. But time is crucial in Washington.
As the Senate campaign progresses, it seems that trust is more important than individual transactions in the late trades. Regarding whether or not MPs ought to engage in trade. About whether disclosure is enough.
As of right now, anyone with an internet connection can search the filings. Additionally, that prominence can be more significant than any one trade during an election year.