US Federal Senate Bill SB4402

US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/27/26
• Refer: 4/27/26

Caption

A bill to require a report on the use of artificial intelligence with respect to access to unminimized information collected pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, and for other purposes.

Summary

SB 4402 would require the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence to produce a report within 120 days on every use of artificial intelligence that has access to unminimized information collected under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The report must describe each AI system’s name, purpose, testing and evaluation, continuous monitoring, human review protocols, training data, access to FISA-derived information, any additional data sources used, and whether the use has already been reported or addressed by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The bill also requires the report to be issued in both classified and unclassified form, with the unclassified version made public on DOJ and ODNI websites. The bill further imposes a forward-looking notification requirement before any future AI system is given access to unminimized FISA information. Before such access is granted, DOJ and ODNI must notify specified congressional committees and FISA court judges and provide an assessment of whether the proposed use complies with FISA, existing court procedures or opinions, and other applicable laws and regulations. The measure is aimed at creating transparency and oversight around government use of AI in sensitive national security surveillance contexts.

Impact

If enacted, the bill would not directly amend FISA’s substantive surveillance authorities, but it would add reporting and pre-clearance-style oversight obligations for executive branch use of AI with access to raw FISA-collected information. It would affect the Department of Justice, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, congressional intelligence and judiciary committees, and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and Court of Review by requiring disclosures to all of them. It would also create a public-facing unclassified report, increasing transparency around classified surveillance-related AI use while preserving classified reporting for sensitive details.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes, the measure appears to be framed as an oversight and transparency bill rather than a partisan policy overhaul. Its structure suggests support for careful monitoring of AI in national security settings, with emphasis on human review, compliance, and disclosure. No opposing views are documented in the provided materials, so the overall sentiment can only be characterized as cautious and oversight-oriented.

Contention

The main potential point of contention is the balance between transparency and national security secrecy. Requiring public reporting on AI systems used with unminimized FISA information could raise concerns about exposing sensitive intelligence capabilities, even though the bill allows classified reporting as well. Another likely issue is the added administrative burden on DOJ and ODNI, especially the requirement to notify Congress and the FISA courts before future AI access is granted and to assess legal compliance in advance. Supporters would likely emphasize accountability, while critics may worry about operational flexibility and disclosure risks.