Introduced January 15, 2026 by Christopher A. Coons · Last progress January 15, 2026
The bill strengthens law-enforcement’s ability to investigate child sexual-exploitation by permitting delayed notice and secrecy while adding procedural safeguards and limited transparency — but it also delays notice to customers, risks broader use of secrecy, can burden providers, and may chill speech.
Law enforcement agencies investigating child sexual-exploitation can delay notifying affected customers for up to one year, helping prevent destruction of evidence and witness intimidation.
Courts must issue written factual findings and narrowly tailor nondisclosure orders, creating procedural safeguards that reduce the risk of overly broad secrecy.
Communications providers can challenge nondisclosure orders and seek stays, protecting providers' legal rights and adding a check on government secrecy.
Customers whose communications are accessed may not learn about government searches for months or years, reducing their ability to promptly challenge potentially unlawful searches.
Nondisclosure orders could be applied more broadly than intended if courts accept the bill's presumptions, risking unnecessary secrecy for investigations beyond the most severe offenses.
Restrictions on notifying journalists and others could chill reporting and injure First Amendment interests when orders touch media-related activities.
Based on analysis of 2 sections of legislative text.
Authorizes courts to issue time-limited nondisclosure orders barring providers from notifying users about warrants/orders/subpoenas, with rules, durations, and judicial findings.
Allows a court to issue time-limited nondisclosure orders that bar electronic communications or remote computing service providers from notifying customers or others when the government seeks a warrant, order, or subpoena for their records or communications. Orders are limited in duration (up to 1 year for child sexual exploitation offenses and up to 90 days for other investigations), must be narrowly tailored, and require a written judicial finding that nondisclosure is likely necessary for specified risks to safety or to the investigation.