Lawmakers are continuing to debate the renewal of a controversial government surveillance law, with its expiration date approaching at the end of the month. This legislation, concerning Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), allows for the warrantless surveillance of foreign targets’ digital communications. A key point of contention is the ability for U.S. officials to search these databases for information on Americans who may be communicating with foreign individuals, raising significant privacy concerns.
The Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act (RISAA), passed in 2024, introduced numerous changes aimed at addressing criticisms of Section 702, including instances of improper searches. However, some provisions have also sparked fears of potentially expanding the surveillance powers. The House and Senate have both passed short-term extensions of the law this week, a move that allows for continued debate as the deadline looms.
Uncertainty Surrounds Effectiveness of Surveillance Law Reforms
Despite the changes implemented by RISAA, there is considerable debate regarding their actual impact. Critics argue that it remains unclear how much the reforms have improved the effectiveness or addressed the drawbacks of the surveillance program. “I don’t think we know” what good has come of it, stated Elizabeth Goitein, senior director at the Brennan Center for Justice’s liberty and national security program. She added that without reliable data, it’s also difficult to determine if concerns about expanded powers have materialized.
Jake Laperruque, deputy director of the Center for Democracy and Technology’s security and surveillance project, echoed these sentiments, noting a lack of transparency. “There’s a lot of black boxes here,” he commented, emphasizing the need for more clarity on how these surveillance tools are being used.
Examining Past Changes and Data Disputes
A significant point of contention revolves around the reported decrease in searches involving U.S. persons. A Justice Department inspector general report identified an “advanced filtering tool” used by the FBI that generated queries not initially tracked by the agency, raising questions about the accuracy of past search statistics.
The FBI system’s “advanced filter function” allowed users to review communications by selecting specific casefiles or identifiers. The National Security Division of the Justice Department later raised concerns that searches conducted through this function might constitute separate queries requiring compliance with specific procedural rules.
Statistics provided by intelligence agencies indicate a general decline in U.S. person searches in recent years: 119,383 in 2022, 57,094 in 2023, 5,518 in 2024 and 7,413 in 2025. However, Goitein argued that searches conducted using the filter function should have been counted as queries, suggesting that the FBI did not properly log them for a significant period.
Laperruque also expressed skepticism about the audit mandate within RISAA. He believes that while it could be useful for detecting abuse, its effectiveness is hampered by reliance on the FBI to accurately log all queries for Justice Department review. “You’re trusting DOJ and the executive to engage in self-policing,” Laperruque said, citing public skepticism based on recent Justice Department conduct.
Conversely, Glenn Gerstell, former general counsel at the National Security Agency, posited that RISAA represents substantial reforms. He stated that these changes have had a “dramatic effect,” notably a significant reduction in U.S. person data queries. Gerstell pointed to reports from the Justice Department’s Inspector General and the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) that corroborate this drop, with some even questioning if the number of searches is now overly restrictive.
Regarding the advanced filter function, Gerstell acknowledged some ambiguity but referred to reports suggesting that most of those searches would have been compliant if considered formal queries, as they were often subsets of already compliant investigations. However, he conceded that the exact compliance status and data remain uncertain.
Concerns Over Potential Expansion
Critics also raised concerns that RISAA’s definition of “electronic communications service provider” could inadvertently expand surveillance to a wider range of businesses, including internet cafes or lodging providers. The reported intended target of this change was data centers.
“That was a pretty big expansion with a lot of potential abuse,” Laperruque commented, adding that the actual impact of this change remains largely unknown.
Senator Mark Warner attempted to introduce clarifying language to address these concerns, and the Biden administration stated it would limit the provision’s application to specific businesses. However, Laperruque noted that the Trump administration has not made similar assurances, and Warner’s clarifying language did not become law.
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) recently re-certified the Section 702 program. However, the court reportedly raised objections to the program’s filtering systems, ruling that when such systems are used to search for information on Americans, they must be counted as queries and subject to additional restrictions. The Trump administration plans to appeal this ruling.
Further criticism suggests that many of RISAA’s emphasized changes were merely codifications of reforms already implemented by then-FBI Director Christopher Wray. Critics like Goitein point out that abuses continued even after these measures were put in place.
Gerstell defended the codification of these reforms, noting that the statute formalized some, but not all, of Wray’s changes, and in some aspects, went further. These included requiring deputy FBI director approval for queries targeting elected officials, government appointees, political candidates, or media organizations, addressing previous criticisms of targeted surveillance.
The Path Forward
The debate continues to divide Republicans, with disagreements over a clean reauthorization persisting. Some lawmakers who previously had reservations, such as Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, have reportedly seen their concerns addressed. Others may have been influenced by direct lobbying efforts from the Trump administration.
Additional issues have become intertwined with the reauthorization discussion, including proposals to prevent government agencies from purchasing data from commercial data brokers. However, officials like George Barnes, former deputy director of the NSA, argue that this is a separate matter from Section 702 authority.
Lawmakers from both parties have expressed frustration with the administration’s perceived silence on the issue until recently, as the expiration date approached. The Trump administration recently released new examples of the law’s successes, including thwarting a potential terrorist attack. Barnes acknowledged that such disclosures can bolster the case for the program but carry risks of revealing classified capabilities to adversaries.
The urgency for reauthorizing Section 702 is also framed around cybersecurity. Barnes stated that the authority has been instrumental in combating cyber threats targeting the U.S. and its interests abroad. Congress is expected to continue discussions and deliberations on the surveillance law’s future, with potential actions dependent on ongoing negotiations and the evolving political landscape.