HR-9238-119
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 198 - 218 (Roll no. 221).
Sponsored by Eric Crawford (R-AR)
What it does
This bill would extend the expiration date of Title VII of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) — which authorizes warrantless surveillance of foreign targets overseas, including collection of communications involving Americans — from June 12, 2026 to July 2, 2026. It would also extend a related wiretapping authority under federal criminal law by the same 20-day period. The bill is a short-term extension only and would make no substantive changes to the underlying surveillance authorities.
Who benefits
U.S. intelligence agencies (NSA, CIA, FBI) that rely on Section 702 collection to gather foreign intelligence without interruption. National security officials who argue a lapse would create gaps in surveillance coverage. Lawmakers and negotiators who would gain additional time to reach agreement on longer-term reauthorization. Indirectly, any person or institution whose security may depend on uninterrupted foreign intelligence collection.
Who is hurt
Americans whose communications may be incidentally collected under Section 702 surveillance and who would not gain any new privacy protections under this extension. Civil liberties advocates who argue each extension without reform delays accountability. Lawmakers seeking to use the expiration deadline as leverage to attach privacy or oversight provisions. Foreign nationals targeted by the surveillance who would continue to be subject to collection without a warrant.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that allowing Section 702 to lapse — even briefly — would create an immediate and dangerous gap in the intelligence community's ability to monitor foreign threats, including terrorism and foreign adversary activity. They contend that short-term extensions are a routine and responsible tool to prevent unintended lapses while Congress works toward a longer-term reauthorization, and that the cost of a surveillance gap far outweighs the minimal delay a 20-day extension represents.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that repeated short-term extensions allow Congress to avoid the harder work of enacting meaningful reforms to Section 702, which the FBI has used to conduct warrantless searches of Americans' communications — a practice documented in multiple FISA Court opinions and Inspector General reports. They contend that each clean extension without reform normalizes expansive surveillance and removes the expiration deadline that gives privacy advocates their only real legislative leverage.
Constitutional context
Title VII of FISA implicates the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, as well as the Suspension Clause (Art. I, §9, cl. 2) and Fifth Amendment due process concerns for U.S. persons whose communications are incidentally collected. In Boumediene v. Bush (2008), the Supreme Court affirmed that constitutional rights do not simply vanish in national security contexts, though courts have generally declined to rule directly on the constitutionality of Section 702 collection.
Checks and balances
The Executive Branch (intelligence agencies) retains surveillance authority under this extension; congressional oversight through the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court provide the primary checks on that authority.
Historical precedent
Section 702 has been reauthorized multiple times since its enactment in 2008, including through short-term extensions in 2023 and 2024, often used as bridging measures while Congress negotiated longer-term reauthorization packages.