Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/7072

Bill Overview

Title: NDO Fairness Act

Description: This bill makes various changes to the procedures and requirements with respect to delayed notification orders. Current law authorizes the government to compel providers of electronic communication services or remote computing services to disclose certain records and information pertaining to subscribers and customers. Further, a provider may notify subscribers or customers of the government's request for records and information unless the government obtains a delayed notification order. With respect to delayed notification orders, the bill raises the standard for courts to grant a delayed notification order, requires courts to issue delayed notification orders only after issuing a written determination based on specific facts, requires orders to be narrowly tailored, and shortens the duration of delayed notification orders. Finally, the bill requires the Department of Justice to report annually on data related to delayed notification orders, including the number of customers targeted; the number of applications for orders; the number of orders granted, extended, or denied; and the number of orders targeting members of the media or conduct related to certain protected activities.

Sponsors: Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-10]

Target Audience

Population: Subscribers and customers of electronic communication services or remote computing services

Estimated Size: 280000000

• The bill affects subscribers and customers of electronic communication services or remote computing services, who could be impacted by government requests for their records and information.
• The population includes individuals who are concerned about privacy and government surveillance, particularly those who might be under investigation or whose data might be requested.
• Subscribers to electronic communication services, which represents a significant portion of the global population, are impacted.
• The bill's impact extends to individuals who might seek legal redress if they believe their rights have been violated under the revised order procedures.
• The bill targets improvements in privacy and data protection, appealing to all users who value electronic privacy.

Reasoning

• The policy impacts consumers of electronic services who value privacy protection from government surveillance. However, the level of impact varies based on individual privacy concerns, legal knowledge, and whether they have been or could be subjects of a government investigation.
• The policy primarily benefits those who have been wronged by delayed notification orders, potentially enabling them to seek redress through civil remedies.
• The policy will not greatly affect individuals who do not feel at risk from government surveillance or have no significant stake in electronic privacy protection.
• The costs of implementing the policy need to be balanced with the potential benefits for individual rights, which may not be tangible immediately.
• The budget constraints imply that while the policy can make significant changes in legal procedures, it will target a subset of the population directly interacting with such legal processes or those educated enough to contest violations.

Simulated Interviews

Cost Estimates

Key Considerations

• The increased administrative burden and legal costs might strain existing Department of Justice resources unless adequately funded.
• High standards for orders might delay government investigations, potentially affecting public safety if not managed effectively.
• Legal accountability through civil remedies could lead to additional litigation, impacting both government agencies and service providers.