US Federal House Bill HB1591

US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/26/25
• Refer: 2/26/25

Caption

Security Clearance Review Act

Summary

HB1591, titled the Security Clearance Review Act, would amend the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 to change how security clearances and access determinations are handled for political appointees and special Government employees serving in the Executive Office of the President. Under the bill, such individuals could not be employed, detailed, or assigned to the Executive Office unless their service is clearly consistent with national security, and they could not receive a security clearance or access classified information unless the determination is made by the Director of the FBI. The bill also creates a notification and oversight process. If the FBI Director denies, suspends, or revokes a clearance or access determination, the Director must notify the President and the relevant congressional committees immediately. If the President overrides, reverses, modifies, or otherwise does not recognize that determination, the President must provide Congress a written explanation within 30 days. The bill defines “political appointee” by reference to existing federal law and uses the criminal code definition of “special Government employee.”

Impact

The bill would add a new subsection to 50 U.S.C. 3341, directly affecting federal security-clearance procedures for certain personnel in the Executive Office of the President. It would shift authority for clearance and classified-access decisions for political appointees and special Government employees from the usual executive-branch process to the FBI Director, while also requiring congressional notice and written justification for any presidential override. The practical effect would be to increase external oversight and constrain presidential discretion over access to classified information in the White House complex.

Sentiment

Based on the bill’s sponsorship and lack of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the available sentiment appears generally supportive among the introducing members, who are largely Democrats. The bill’s framing suggests a reform-oriented response to concerns about White House security clearance practices and the handling of classified information. No opposing arguments are captured in the provided record, so the broader political reaction cannot be determined from the available context.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely the allocation of authority over security clearances: the bill gives the FBI Director final decision-making power for certain White House personnel and requires the President to justify any override to Congress. Supporters would likely view this as a national-security safeguard and an accountability measure, while critics may see it as an intrusion on presidential control over the Executive Office and staffing decisions. Another potential issue is whether the FBI, rather than the White House or another executive-branch security office, should make these determinations for political appointees and special Government employees.