hold on there's just too much going on in Congress lmao...
Increases transparency for government surveillance orders and ensures eventual target notification.
Senators Wyden (D-OR), Daines (R-MT), Lee (R-UT), and Booker (D-NJ).
Introduced in the Senate, referred to Judiciary Committee.
This bill creates new rules to make criminal surveillance orders, applications, and related documents eventually public. It requires targets of surveillance to be notified after a period, and limits how long such orders can remain secret. Introduced by Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) with bipartisan co-sponsors, the bill aims to reform government surveillance practices. It is currently awaiting review and potential action by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Introduced Feb 25, 2026
Senator Wyden introduced S. 3918 in the Senate on February 25, 2026. It was then referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary for consideration. Before it can become law, the bill must be approved by this committee, pass a vote in the full Senate, then pass the House of Representatives, and finally be signed by the President. No votes have occurred yet.
If this bill becomes law, criminal surveillance orders (including wiretaps, pen registers, and electronic data access requests) could not be kept secret indefinitely; they would eventually be unsealed. You would also be notified if law enforcement accessed your electronic communications or records, unless a court specifically delays notice for a limited time. Additionally, federal, state, and tribal courts would be required to publish more details about all surveillance applications they receive, including the type of crime investigated and how long surveillance was authorized, in a machine-readable format.
Supporters Say
Supporters argue it increases government transparency and protects privacy by limiting secret surveillance and ensuring eventual public notice.
Critics Say
Critics might argue these changes could impede law enforcement's ability to conduct investigations effectively by forcing earlier disclosure.
Proponents of the bill emphasize that increased transparency regarding surveillance orders is crucial for civil liberties and government accountability, ensuring individuals are not targeted indefinitely without their knowledge. They believe the current system allows too much secrecy, which can be abused. Opponents, or those with concerns, might suggest that earlier disclosure or broad public reporting could compromise ongoing investigations, allow suspects to destroy evidence, or endanger informants, thereby hindering efforts to combat crime and ensure public safety.