Sponsors
Ask me about this bill
This is not an official government website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Changes to 5 U.S.C. 405(b) add a new required item for reports that asks for a detailed description of any communication (or attempted communication) between the "establishment" and specified online service providers. The new reporting item directs inclusion of three named categories of communications and cross-references definitions and content-moderation language from the Communications Act (47 U.S.C. 230). The amendment is mainly a documentation and transparency change: it tweaks punctuation in two existing subparagraphs and requires the establishment to describe interactions with online platforms, including certain facilitation, removal, or moderation-related exchanges.
Amend 5 U.S.C. 405(b), paragraph (21)(B), by striking the word "and" at the end of that subparagraph. In plain terms: remove the final word "and" from paragraph (21)(B).
Amend 5 U.S.C. 405(b), paragraph (22)(B), by replacing the final period with a semicolon and the word "and" (i.e., change the ending punctuation to allow another item to follow).
Add a new paragraph (23) to 5 U.S.C. 405(b) requiring a detailed description of the contents and particular circumstances of any communication, or attempted communication, between the "establishment" and any internet computer service, information content provider, or access software provider (each term as defined under 47 U.S.C. 230(f)).
Within the new paragraph (23), require inclusion of communications regarding content moderation (as described under 47 U.S.C. 230(c)(2)).
Within the new paragraph (23), require inclusion of communications about user content, explicitly including posts, photos, and videos.
Who is affected and how:
The "establishment" (the entity or office required to produce the statutory report) is directly affected: it must collect, prepare, and include a new, detailed reporting item describing any communications or attempted communications with certain online service providers. That may require new internal recordkeeping, review, and redaction procedures.
Online service providers / platform operators are secondarily affected: the establishment will seek details about communications with them, which may prompt platforms to preserve records, respond to information requests, or change how they document or label interactions with government or establishment officials. Platforms may face modest compliance costs to assemble summaries or provide records.
Platform users and the public are indirectly affected through increased transparency: the new disclosures could reveal the nature and frequency of interactions between the establishment and platforms about content facilitation, removal requests, or moderation policies. That may inform public debate about government-platform interactions.
Administrative/legal staff and counsel may face increased workload to determine what communications are reportable, whether any exemptions (e.g., confidentiality, national security, law-enforcement privilege) apply, and how to summarize communications without disclosing sensitive information. If the statute's implementing guidance is narrow, agencies may need to develop policies balancing transparency and confidentiality.
Overall effect: this is a narrowly targeted transparency amendment that imposes modest procedural and documentation burdens on the establishment and may require platforms to support information access; it does not change liability rules under section 230 or create new prohibitions or funding programs. Potential secondary issues include privacy/confidentiality concerns and administrative costs to collect and redact reportable communications.
Expand sections to see detailed analysis
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Introduced January 9, 2025 by Eric Stephen Schmitt · Last progress January 9, 2025
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Introduced in Senate