HR-7816-119
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Sponsored by Andy Biggs (R-AZ)
What it does
This bill would place new restrictions on the federal government's ability to collect information about Americans without a warrant. Based on its title, it would likely modify or repeal provisions of existing surveillance law — such as Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) — that currently allow intelligence agencies to collect communications data without obtaining an individual warrant. The specific mechanisms, scope, and agencies affected are not detailed in the available bill text.
Who benefits
American citizens and residents whose communications data is currently collected under warrantless surveillance programs. Privacy advocates and civil liberties organizations. Journalists, lawyers, and activists who may be incidentally swept up in foreign intelligence collection. Technology companies that face legal and reputational pressure related to government data requests. Foreign nationals communicating with Americans who could see reduced exposure.
Who is hurt
Intelligence agencies (NSA, CIA, FBI) that rely on warrantless collection tools to monitor foreign threats. Federal prosecutors who use evidence derived from Section 702 collection in criminal cases. Counterterrorism and counterintelligence operations that depend on rapid, large-scale data collection. Allies in intelligence-sharing partnerships (Five Eyes) whose joint operations may be affected. Potentially, national security broadly if surveillance gaps emerge.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that warrantless surveillance programs sweep up vast quantities of Americans' private communications without individualized suspicion, violating the Fourth Amendment's core protection against unreasonable searches. They point to the Supreme Court's ruling in Carpenter v. United States (2018), which held that comprehensive digital records warrant constitutional protection, as evidence that current surveillance practices are on legally uncertain ground and that legislative correction is overdue.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that warrantless foreign intelligence collection under programs like Section 702 targets non-U.S. persons abroad and has produced critical intelligence used to disrupt terrorist plots and foreign espionage, with the government reporting hundreds of disrupted threats. They contend that requiring individual warrants for foreign intelligence collection would impose procedural delays incompatible with fast-moving national security threats, and that existing FISA Court oversight already provides a meaningful judicial check on potential abuses.
Constitutional context
The Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches is central here. Carpenter v. United States (2018) established that the government needs a warrant for comprehensive digital records, creating active uncertainty about the constitutionality of bulk surveillance programs. The Declare War and Commander-in-Chief Clauses (Art. I, §8 and Art. II, §2) are also relevant, as intelligence collection is closely tied to national security powers shared between Congress and the Executive.
Checks and balances
Congress would gain authority by restricting Executive Branch surveillance powers; the Executive Branch (intelligence agencies) would lose discretion to collect data without judicial approval, with the FISA Court or Article III courts serving as the primary check on any remaining collection authority.
Historical precedent
The USA FREEDOM Act (2015) placed the first significant statutory limits on bulk telephone metadata collection following the 2013 Snowden disclosures, and Section 702 of FISA has been reauthorized multiple times (most recently in 2024) amid ongoing congressional debate over warrantless collection of Americans' communications.