Massie and Boebert seek warrants for AI and third‑party data

On April 23, 2026, Reps. Thomas Massie (R‑Ky.) and Lauren Boebert (R‑Colo.) introduced the Surveillance Accountability Act to require warrants for federal searches of data held by third parties and to extend that requirement to AI‑assisted surveillance, biometric records and automated license‑plate readers. The bill would amend Title 18 of the U.S. Code, close the so‑called third‑party doctrine and create a private right of action allowing individuals to sue the government for Fourth Amendment violations.

The proposal targets the third‑party doctrine, a legal rule rooted in 1970s Supreme Court cases United States v. Miller and Smith v. Maryland. Those rulings held that information voluntarily provided to banks or phone companies carries a reduced expectation of privacy. The draft legislation would require probable‑cause warrants for government searches of records held by banks, phone carriers, cloud providers and other private firms.

The text names AI‑assisted surveillance tools, biometric databases and automated license‑plate readers as categories that would require judicial approval before federal agencies access underlying records. Drafting notes cite concern that automated analysis of large data sets can create detailed profiles and enable sorting, ranking and tracking of people at scale.

Naomi Brockwell, founder of the Ludlow Institute and a participant in the bill’s drafting, wrote that “Now that we have AI, that idea of limitation is completely out the window.” She added that automated analysis can infer intimate details and predict behavior from routine records.

On automated license‑plate readers Brockwell used the mosaic idea to describe cumulative tracking risks, writing: “If your car is in public and I take a snapshot of it, you don’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy. 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.”

The legislation would give citizens standing to bring lawsuits when their Fourth Amendment rights are violated. Backers view that private right of action as a check on unlawful or overly broad surveillance and say the bill complements other congressional efforts to limit warrantless collection under statutes such as Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Companies sell AI tools that analyze images, location data and other records for law enforcement, and federal agencies are testing advanced language and image models inside classified networks. Critics argue a broad warrant requirement could slow criminal investigations and complicate national security operations that depend on rapid access to third‑party records. Proponents contend that requiring warrants restores judicial oversight while preserving law enforcement access when probable cause is shown.

The bill was released with a planned press event on Capitol Hill. Its prospects in Congress are uncertain; supporters report interest from lawmakers in both parties. If the measure advances out of committee and becomes law, it would change how courts and agencies treat privacy expectations for data shared with third parties.