House rejects FISA extension, surveillance law set to lapse Friday

The government’s most consequential foreign-surveillance authority was on track to lapse Friday after the House rejected a three-week extension, leaving Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act without a fresh mandate. If Congress did nothing, intelligence agencies would lose the legal footing to collect foreigners’ communications under the statute, while privacy advocates would gain leverage in a fight over warrantless searches that can sweep in Americans’ data.

Section 702 was enacted in 2008 and has never been made permanent. Congress last reauthorized it in April 2024 through the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, which set a sunset date of April 20, 2026. Lawmakers then passed a 45-day stopgap on April 30 to push the deadline to June 12, but the Senate failed to advance another reauthorization in a 47-52 procedural vote on June 5, putting the program squarely on the brink.

The House vote on Thursday sealed that outcome for now. Members rejected the extension 198-218, falling short of the two-thirds margin used for fast-track consideration. Nineteen Republicans voted no and seven Democrats voted yes, a split that underscored how deeply the issue cuts across party lines even as most Democrats opposed the renewal and many Republicans backed it.

The collapse of the talks was fueled in part by objections to President Donald Trump’s choice of Bill Pulte, the Federal Housing Finance Agency director, as acting director of national intelligence. Lawmakers in both chambers also pointed to broader privacy concerns, reflecting years of debate over whether Section 702 gives the government too much power to search communications gathered from foreigners overseas for information about Americans without a warrant.

Supporters of the authority argue it remains a critical intelligence tool for tracking foreign targets and protecting national security. Critics say the repeated reauthorizations have not solved the core problem: a surveillance system built for foreign intelligence that can still expose Americans’ communications to government scrutiny. Even if the statute lapses, some surveillance may not stop immediately because intelligence agencies operate under yearlong certifications approved by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, a wrinkle that blunts the immediate operational impact but does not settle the larger fight.

The standoff now lands at the center of a rare collision between national security, privacy and institutional trust. Congress failed to keep one of its most controversial surveillance powers on a stable legal footing, and the next move will determine whether lawmakers tighten the rules or let the uncertainty deepen.