A Republican bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Surveillance Accountability Act aims to amend title 18 of the United States Code regarding Fourth Amendment protections. It requires a warrant based on probable cause for searches that significantly impinge on a person's privacy or security. The bill establishes a presumption of privacy for data held by third parties, such as financial or telecommunications providers. It also provides specific exceptions for certain law enforcement actions like plain-view searches and identity verification. Finally, the act creates a right of action for individuals to seek redress for the deprivation of their Fourth Amendment rights.
Yes· 3 of 26
- Scored +10
Does this protect people from being watched or searched?
The bill significantly strengthens privacy by requiring warrants for accessing third-party data and biometric information.
- Scored +9
Does this give people more control over their personal data?
The bill establishes a presumption of privacy for digital data held by third-party service providers.
- Scored +7
Does this change how police departments operate?
The bill mandates a warrant for searches of third-party data and limits warrantless biometric and vehicle tracking.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Enhanced Privacy for Third-Party Data: The bill establishes a presumption that the government cannot access a person's data, metadata, or personal information held by third parties—such as internet service providers or cloud storage companies—without a valid warrant (Section 2(a)(2)).
-
Protection Against Contractual Waivers: It prevents companies from using contractual agreements to waive a user's warrant requirement, unless that waiver is explicit, knowing, and voluntary (Section 2(a)(2)(B)).
-
Limits on Automated Surveillance: The bill restricts the warrantless collection of biometric data, such as facial images or voice recognition, and vehicle movement patterns obtained through automated license plate readers, unless the person gave informed and voluntary consent (Section 2(c)).
-
Right to Legal Redress: It provides a right of action for individuals to sue for redress if they are subjected to the deprivation of rights or immunities secured by the Fourth Amendment (Section 3(a)).
-
Access to Legal Costs: In successful legal actions to enforce these rights, a court has the discretion to award the prevailing party reasonable attorney's fees (Section 3(a)(b)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Restrictions on Information Collection: The bill limits the government's ability to collect or analyze information that is lawfully published or voluntarily made available to a public audience without a warrant, unless it requires no circumvention of privacy settings or encryption (Section 2(b)(3)).
-
Limitations on Public Data Usage: The bill restricts the warrantless collection of data even when it is exposed to public view or accessible to a third party, specifically regarding biometric data and license plate images, unless informed consent was provided (Section 2(c)).
-
Restrictions on Law Enforcement Employees: While the bill allows for a right of action, it explicitly states that a Federal employee cannot use this section to sue their own Federal employer or the Federal Government for conduct within the scope of their employment (Section 3(a)(d)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would Black Americans be better off under this? — The bill provides enhanced protections against warrantless surveillance and data collection. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — The bill provides enhanced protections against warrantless surveillance and data collection. Would farmers be better off under this? — The bill provides enhanced privacy protections for all citizens. Would high-income households be better off under this? — The bill increases privacy protections for all individuals' financial and personal information. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — The bill provides enhanced protections against warrantless surveillance and data collection. Would immigrants be better off under this? — The bill protects the privacy of those within the jurisdiction of the United States. Would LGBTQ people be better off under this? — The bill enhances privacy for personal data and communications. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Enhanced privacy protections for third-party data benefits all citizens regardless of economic status. Would men be better off under this? — The bill strengthens privacy rights for all individuals. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The bill protects personal data held by financial and telecommunications providers. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — The bill provides enhanced protections against warrantless surveillance and data collection. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — The bill strengthens the privacy of personal and biometric data. Would retired people be better off under this? — The bill protects financial and personal data held by third parties. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — The bill provides enhanced protections against automated surveillance in public spaces. Would students be better off under this? — The bill increases privacy protections for digital and personal information. Would union members be better off under this? — The bill protects personal data held by third parties. Would people in cities be better off under this? — The bill provides enhanced protections against automated surveillance in public spaces. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — The bill provides stronger Fourth Amendment protections for all citizens. Would white Americans be better off under this? — The bill provides enhanced protections against warrantless surveillance and data collection. Would women be better off under this? — The bill strengthens privacy rights for all individuals. Would gun owners be better off under this? — The bill does not directly address firearm ownership or second amendment rights.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect people from being watched or searched? — The bill significantly strengthens privacy by requiring warrants for accessing third-party data and biometric information. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill creates a right of action for individuals to seek redress for Fourth Amendment violations.
- Education And Technology
- Does this give people more control over their personal data? — The bill establishes a presumption of privacy for digital data held by third-party service providers.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this change how police departments operate? — The bill mandates a warrant for searches of third-party data and limits warrantless biometric and vehicle tracking. Does this expand the rights of people with disabilities? — The bill provides broader privacy protections that apply to all individuals regardless of disability status.
- 4/23/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
Lauren BoebertRepublican · Colorado