The Bill to End Secret Surveillance Orders

Bipartisan legislation would require law enforcement to notify you when they access your digital data. Most never find out.

TL;DR: On February 25, 2026, a bipartisan group of senators reintroduced the Government Surveillance Transparency Act. The core idea: when law enforcement gets a court order to surveil your digital communications, you eventually get notified. Right now, 99.7% of surveillance orders sealed "until further order of the court" stay sealed forever. You never find out. The bill would also force courts to publish statistics on surveillance orders and let providers challenge indefinite sealing. The sponsors: Wyden (D-OR), Daines (R-MT), Booker (D-NJ), and Lee (R-UT). The House version is led by Lieu (D-CA) and Davidson (R-OH).

The 99.7% Problem

Here's something courts don't want you to know: when judges issue surveillance orders, they can seal them "until further order of the court." Sounds temporary. It isn't.

A federal court analysis found that out of 3,886 pen/trap and surveillance orders sealed with that language, 99.7% remained sealed years later [1]. That means for every 1,000 people whose electronic data was surveilled under court order, 997 never found out.

No notification. No chance to challenge the surveillance. No idea it happened at all.

"Law-abiding Americans deserve to know when and how their government tries to spy on them," Sen. Wyden said in announcing the bill [2].

What the Bill Would Do

1. Notification Requirement

Law enforcement would have to notify you about subpoenas and court-ordered surveillance of your electronic data. Not immediately (the government can still get extensions during active investigations) but eventually. When the investigation ends, you'd find out you were targeted [2][3].

2. End Indefinite Sealing

No more "until further order of the court" as a permanent gag. The bill establishes a process for unsealing surveillance applications and orders once they no longer disrupt an investigation. Courts would have to put sealed cases on public dockets, redacted, but visible [2].

3. Let Providers Fight Back

Tech companies and telecom providers could challenge sealing orders in court. If they win, the government pays their legal fees. Right now, providers face legal risk for even acknowledging surveillance orders exist [2].

4. Notification When They Get It Wrong

If law enforcement searches the wrong person's device or a provider discloses unauthorized data, you'd be notified. Mistakes stay hidden under current law [2].

5. Expanded Annual Reporting

Courts already publish annual wiretap reports. The bill would expand them to include stored communications surveillance and metadata orders. Courts would also publish basic online statistics about authorized surveillance orders, without revealing names or personal info [2][3].

6. State and Tribal Court Grants

Federal grants would help state and tribal courts implement the same transparency requirements. Surveillance isn't just a federal problem [2].

Surveillance by the Numbers

Courts authorized 2,297 wiretaps in 2024, a 9% increase from 2023. Federal judges approved 1,290 wiretaps while state judges authorized 1,007 [4].

But wiretaps are just the tip. Courts issue thousands more orders for stored communications, pen registers (which calls you make), and metadata. Those numbers don't get reported the same way. The 2024 wiretap report runs 135 pages; stored communications surveillance gets a footnote [4].

Drug offenses drove 49% of wiretap applications in 2024. The longest state wiretap ran 683 days in Queens, New York, nearly two years of surveillance for a single narcotics case [4].

Strange Bedfellows

The bill's sponsors come from opposite ends of the political spectrum:

  • Ron Wyden (D-OR): Long-time surveillance critic who's been fighting these battles for two decades
  • Steve Daines (R-MT): Conservative who frames it as government overreach
  • Cory Booker (D-NJ): Progressive focused on civil liberties
  • Mike Lee (R-UT): Libertarian conservative, SAFE Act co-sponsor

The House version has Ted Lieu (D-CA) and Warren Davidson (R-OH), another left-right pairing.

When Wyden and Lee agree on something, pay attention. Lee's also pushing the SAFE Act to add warrant requirements to Section 702 surveillance. The Government Surveillance Transparency Act is complementary: one bill adds warrants, the other adds notification.

Why This Matters Now

A lot has changed since this bill was first introduced in 2022. Three developments make it more urgent:

ICE surveillance is front-page news. Immigration enforcement agencies have deployed facial recognition, location tracking, and social media monitoring on unprecedented scales. The DHS face database holds 1.2 billion images [5]. People want to know if they're in it.

The FISA 702 debate is exploding. Congress has 52 days to decide whether Section 702 (the warrantless surveillance law) gets renewed. Transparency requirements would apply to much of that surveillance too.

Trust in institutions is cratering. Left and right agree the government has too much power to surveil without accountability. This bill offers a concrete reform both sides can support.

What You Can Do

Contact Your Senators

The bill needs co-sponsors. Tell your senators you want notification when law enforcement accesses your data. Find your senator.

Support the House Version

Lieu and Davidson need House co-sponsors. Contact your representative. Find your representative.

Use Encrypted Services

Surveillance orders target service providers. End-to-end encrypted services like Signal and ProtonMail limit what providers can hand over even with a court order.

Request Your Data

Some providers notify users about law enforcement requests when legally allowed. Check your provider's transparency reports and, where available, request information about any data disclosures involving your accounts.

References

  1. In Re Sealing & Non-Disclosure of Pen/Trap/2703(D) Orders, 562 F. Supp. 2d 876 (2008)
  2. Sen. Wyden Press Release - Wyden, Daines, Booker and Lee Reintroduce Bill to Create Transparency for Court-Ordered Surveillance (February 25, 2026)
  3. Rep. Lieu Press Release - Reps Lieu and Davidson Introduce House Bill to Ensure Transparency of Court-Ordered Surveillance
  4. U.S. Courts - 2024 Wiretap Report: Intercepts and Convictions Rise (June 30, 2025)
  5. Bloomberg - DHS Face-Scanning App Pulls From 1.2 Billion-Image Database (February 2, 2026)