Proposed House Bill Would Require Warrants for Government AI Surveillance

The third-party doctrine emerged from two cases—United States v. Miller and Smith v. Maryland—which held that Americans have no reasonable expectation of privacy for information voluntarily shared with third parties, such as banks or phone companies. Brockwell said those cases involved narrow circumstances long before the internet existed, and have since been applied far more broadly.

“Fast forward to 2026, every single thing we do has a third-party involved,” Brockwell said. “The entire internet relies on third-parties, and governments have decided that when they want to search someone, they no longer have to get approval from a judge.”

The bill also addresses biometric surveillance and automated license plate readers. Brockwell pointed to the “mosaic theory” of privacy, a legal framework some courts have used when evaluating bulk data collection.

“If your car is in public and I take a snapshot of it, you don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy,” she said. “But what if I took 10,000 snapshots of your car while it's driving, and matched your exact location to track you? That's a different question. That's what automatic license plate readers are doing now.”

While the legislation aims to protect the privacy of citizens, circumventing that privacy is a lucrative business, with companies like Palantir and Clearview AI selling AI-driven tools used by law enforcement to analyze images, location data, and other records.

The issue came to a head earlier this year when Anthropic clashed with President Donald Trump’s administration over whether the U.S. Government could use its AI systems for mass surveillance and unrestricted military use.

Brockwell said the bill has received bipartisan interest and sees it as complementary to U.S. Representatives Warren Davidson (R-OH) and Oregon Senator Ron Wyden’s effort to reform Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which authorizes certain warrantless surveillance activities.

While critics argue that warrant requirements can slow investigations, Brockwell said the proposal restores judicial oversight.

“What it does is stop abuses of power,” she said. “If law enforcement wants to go after someone, they can absolutely do that. They just need a warrant.”

The office of Representative Massie did not immediately respond to a request for comment by Decrypt.