Representative Andy Biggs (R-AZ) is calling on Congress to pass new protections for Americans' privacy, arguing that the federal government has been spying on its own citizens without proper legal authorization for years.
At the center of Biggs' argument is Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, commonly known as FISA. The law was originally designed to allow the government to monitor foreign threats, but Biggs says it has repeatedly been used to surveil ordinary Americans without a warrant, something he argues is a direct violation of the Fourth Amendment.
"If you want to spy on American citizens, get a warrant," Biggs posted on X, summarizing his position in plain terms.
Biggs pointed to a classified report from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that he says details serious and ongoing violations of the law. Former Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard reportedly sought to declassify the document but was denied.
Biggs is pushing for its public release, arguing that Congress cannot make informed decisions about renewing FISA powers without knowing what is in that report.
Recent Reports
Furthermore, Biggs explained Section 702 has been used to search the communications of roughly 19,000 donors to congressional campaigns, members of Congress, congressional staff, journalists, and everyday Americans who had done nothing wrong.
To address the issue, Biggs introduced a bill called the Protect Liberty and End Warrantless Surveillance Act, or HR 7816. The bill would require government agencies to obtain a warrant before searching an American's communications.
Nevertheless, Biggs pushed back on critics who argue that obtaining warrants takes too long, saying his bill already includes exceptions for genuine emergencies, such as imminent threats and cybersecurity crises.
The bill came remarkably close to passing in the last Congress, reaching a 212-212 tie before falling short.
Biggs emphasized the debate in broad terms, warning that allowing mass surveillance to continue unchecked could eventually make constitutional protections optional for future generations.
"The Constitution still matters," he said.
