Sponsors (4)
The bill strengthens transparency, notice, and procedural clarity around government access to electronic data and provides limited implementation funding, but it increases the risk that sensitive information or investigative methods could be exposed, extends some secrecy authorities, creates recurring administrative and IT costs, and may produce uneven protections across jurisdictions.
The public, researchers, and oversight bodies gain substantially increased transparency into government electronic-surveillance activity because courts and judges must produce searchable, machine-readable reports, inventories, and security certifications about electronic filing and requests.
Individuals and account holders receive stronger notice protections and limits on indefinite secrecy (required notice for targeted communications, caps on sealed warrants/prior orders, and inventories when providers disclose beyond authorization), improving consumer awareness of government access to their data.
Procedures and legal clarity are improved—third‑party order rules are aligned with the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, warrants must list the statute or rule authorizing searches, and AO standardized reporting/forms centralize data—helping courts, providers, and prosecutors apply consistent standards.
People whose communications or records are the subject of orders risk having sensitive personal information published or otherwise exposed when applications, orders, or inventories are made public, increasing privacy harms for individuals.
Publishing detailed inventories, provider disclosures, or reporting about investigations could reveal operational details that compromise law‑enforcement techniques, targets, or ongoing investigations and thereby hinder prosecutions or national-security operations.
The Act expands and formalizes delayed‑notice authorities (including up to 180 days plus an automatic extension and potential further extensions for subpoenas/emergencies), allowing prolonged secrecy that keeps individuals and providers unaware of government access to their data.
Based on analysis of 10 sections of legislative text.
Requires public, searchable access and inventories for many surveillance filings, tightens delayed-notice rules, mandates machine-readable judge reporting, and phases in electronic-filing with grants and deadlines.
Introduced February 25, 2026 by Ronald Lee Wyden · Last progress February 25, 2026
Requires searchable public access to many criminal-surveillance applications, orders, and inventories; strengthens notice rules for targets and third parties; and requires judges and courts to file machine-readable reports about surveillance orders. It limits how long agencies can delay notice, mandates inventories when providers disclose or the government obtains data beyond what was authorized, phases in electronic-filing requirements with exceptions for courts lacking electronic dockets, and funds court implementation through grants and AOUSC support.