Congress
How Donald Trump could upend Congress’ next spy-powers fight
Privacy advocates have tried again and again over the past decade to rein in a major U.S. spy program that targets foreigners but also sweeps up data on Americans — and each time, they have fallen short.
They believe 2026 might be different.
The surveillance program in question, known as Section 702, expires in mid-April. Its critics, who believe it too easily allows Americans’ private communications to get caught up in government dragnets meant to ensnare overseas targets, are readying a major push to rewrite the law — and they are hoping they have a crucial new ally in President Donald Trump.
The president has long had an antagonistic relationship with the intelligence community, and some of his closest allies in Congress are among Section 702’s fiercest critics. But persistent lobbying from national security officials and backing from top congressional leaders has been enough to save the program in the past, including during Trump’s first term.
Some of its congressional backers aren’t seeing the same level of engagement this time — at least not yet.
“I spent the last week shaking cages with IC leaders saying, ‘You know, this is going to be a heavy lift,’” said Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. “When we reauthorized it last time, Cabinet secretaries were taking random members of Congress out to Starbucks, and I don’t see that effort. So I’m very concerned.”
The bipartisan coalition seeking a sweeping overhaul of the surveillance authority has reasons to be optimistic that Trump might ultimately back their efforts, overruling intelligence officials who have long warned that requiring a warrant to search for any Americans’ data and putting in place other safeguards critics seek would make the program unworkable.
“I think a lot of the rationale that was used against us has just basically dissipated,” said Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), who has long pushed for the warrant requirement and continues lobbying various factions for it. “So I think we’re real close to getting some agreements, but right now it’s the warm-up phase.”
Even those who want to keep the current spy authorities intact recognize the president’s potential to swing the debate at the 11th hour.
Trump is “the 800-pound gorilla in the closet,” said one Democratic congressional aide, granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the coming reauthorization fight.
As president in 2020, Trump helped upend three unrelated surveillance programs, all of which ultimately expired, after back-channeling with privacy hawks and breaking with his then-attorney general, Bill Barr.
During the last reauthorization debate in 2024, then-candidate Trump urged Congress to “kill” the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the larger spy law that Section 702 is nested under. Trump’s decision frustrated supporters of the program — in part because they believe he conflated the foreign-target spy program with the broader surveillance law that was not up for reauthorization.
A crucial Biggs-sponsored House amendment that would have added a warrant requirement for any communications involving Americans failed on a 212-212 tie, with Speaker Mike Johnson casting a rare and decisive vote to kill it.
Now the spy powers fight is a major headache for Johnson, who infuriated privacy hawks with his 2024 amendment vote after having advocated for more surveillance guardrails as a former member of the Judiciary Committee.
Judiciary Committee Republicans — led by Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, a close Trump ally — have started discussing how to approach the reauthorization during their weekly meetings. Jordan said in an interview he is again hoping to impose a warrant requirement for searches involving Americans as well as a ban on data brokers selling consumer information to law enforcement.
He said he has “had some discussions over this past year with some members of the administration” on this issue and plans to meet alongside House Intelligence Committee Chair Rick Crawford (R-Ark.) with White House officials on the matter early next year.
Lawmakers on both sides of the debate are carefully watching Crawford, who opposed the warrant requirement in 2024 — along with every other House Intelligence Committee Republican. But Johnson has since added five Republicans to the panel who each voted for the Biggs amendment.
A committee spokesperson said Crawford is working with House leadership, Jordan, the Senate and the administration “to determine the best way forward to extend 702 authority.”
There are still, however, a majority of Intelligence Committee Republicans who are working to extend the program without adding a warrant requirement — and they are hoping administration officials whom they view as allies, including Vice President JD Vance, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, will be able to sway Trump.
“Ultimately the president is going to have to make the decision on it, but I think the people weighing in have a record of not supporting the warrant requirement and knowing it jeopardizes national security,” Rep. Darin LaHood (R-Ill.), an Intelligence Committee member, said in an interview.
Spokespeople for the CIA, National Security Agency and the FBI declined to respond to questions about whether they are in contact with the White House, if they support a clean reauthorization of the current bill, and whether they have engaged with Congress on the issue. The Justice Department, White House and Office of the Director of National Intelligence did not respond to a request for comment.
Some House Republicans are privately hoping that the Senate takes the lead, believing it would be easier to get an extension without major changes across the finish line there. That, they believe, would ease its path to passage on the House side.
Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) is quietly pitching an 18-month extension of the authority, effectively punting the surveillance fight until the end of 2027, according to House and Senate Intelligence Committee Republicans. His panel and the Senate Armed Services Committee are expected to hold hearings early next year on Lt. Gen. Joshua Rudd’s nomination as commander of U.S. Cyber Command and director of the National Security Agency.
Those hearings could be the first real indication of how some key lawmakers are approaching the impending reauthorization fight. While some Democrats such as Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden have been longstanding critics of warrantless surveillance, others have generally been more sympathetic to intelligence officials.
But now, with Trump instead of Joe Biden in the White House, that could be changing. For instance, Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland was among the majority of Democrats who voted against the warrant requirement amendment in 2024. But during a Judiciary subcommittee hearing this month, Raskin referred to “an assault on the FBI’s internal guardrails against abuse of Section 702 authorities” during Trump’s second term.
“There is an inherent number [of House Democrats] that will reject their ‘yes’ vote and switch just because of Donald Trump,” the Democratic congressional aide said about the warrant requirement. Privacy hawks have also already polled first-term GOP lawmakers to gauge how they might come down, according to one person granted anonymity to discuss the private effort.
Jordan predicted his pro-warrant coalition will “get more Democrat votes this time, and I’m hopeful that we can keep all the Republican votes we had last time.”
A top pollster for President Donald Trump is pushing back on recent public polling showing Republican Mike Rogers trailing progressive Abdul El-Sayed in the marquee Michigan Senate race.
Tony Fabrizio, who is conducting polling for Rogers, says the polls released this month are over-sampling Democratic-leaning voters, specifically college-educated and Black voters, according to an internal memo obtained by Blue Light News. A Susquehanna poll released this month showed El-Sayed leading by seven points and a TIPP poll showed him leading by four points.
El-Sayed’s lead in those polls is a “fake narrative,” Fabrizio wrote. His polling for AARP — conducted alongside Democratic firm Impact Research — showed the race essentially tied.
The warning follows huge polling misses in the Democratic primaries in the Michigan, Wisconsin and Florida, which he wrote were “some of the most egregious examples of public polling failures in recent memory.” It’s also a sign that Republicans are wary of the string of bad polling numbers for Rogers in the race, which is crucial for determining control of the chamber.
Jim Lee, CEO of Susquehanna Polling and Research, told Blue Light News that the firm did not oversample any demographics. “I think their head is in the sand,” Lee said, noting in part what he said was a gap in enthusiasm between Democratic and Republican voters this cycle.
TIPP didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Fabrizio, in the memo, argued on the Susquehanna poll: “50% of the sample in this survey is college-educated – making them massively overrepresented to what they should be. We took a look at 2022 and 2024 Exit Polls and VoteCast data and, as shown below, there is no indication that the Michigan electorate will be anywhere near 50% college-educated. In fact, it is unlikely they will be even 40% college-educated.”
He also noted “a huge gap” between college-educated and non-college educated voters.
“This was the driving issue of the public polling misses for President Trump in 2016 and 2024, especially in the Upper Midwest states of Michigan and Wisconsin,” Fabrizio added. “By increasing college-educated voters by 10+ points, and thus decreasing non-college educated voters by the same, we can pretty much guarantee this poll is significantly overestimating El-Sayed’s vote share.”
President Donald Trump and hemp industry lobbyists are hoping to win a final vote on Capitol Hill next week to skirt a ban on intoxicating products — with shutdown politics as leverage.
Nine months ago, Congress cleared a bill to close a loophole created in 2018 that allowed the sale of some hemp-derived products containing types of THC colloquially known as “diet weed.” That ban is supposed to take effect in mid-November, or roughly 11 weeks, to limit overall THC levels in hemp products that can get people high — including gummies, canned drinks, pills and vapes.
But Trump and industry leaders successfully lobbied Senate leaders to add language to a government funding patch earlier this month to delay the ban until mid-December, with the administration promising instead to finalize regulations cracking down on how the products are made and sold.
Now House Republican leaders are aiming to clear that bill for Trump’s signature early next week, according to three people granted anonymity to disclose private discussions. And many GOP lawmakers are not pleased at the prospect of being rolled.
Rep. Riley Moore (R-W.Va.) told reporters last week that he expected House lawmakers would “iron out” some “sticking points” with the Senate-passed funding bill, “particularly the hemp issue,” rather than pass the legislation without changes — which appears to be GOP leadership’s current plan.
Sen. Ted Budd (R-N.C.) was more blunt: “it is morally reprehensible to threaten a shutdown over a loophole Congress agreed to close to less than a year ago,” he said in a statement Thursday.
Yet despite fierce pushback from lawmakers warning that the intoxicating products are harming Americans, hemp industry leaders are preparing for a victory, betting members of Congress ultimately care more about swiftly passing legislation to avert a Sept. 30 government shutdown before the midterms.
“Any effort to try to shut down the government — over a one-month delay on a hemp issue — I don’t think is going to fly well with most members of Congress,” Jonathan Miller, a top lawyer for the U.S. Hemp Roundtable advocacy group, said in an interview this week.
The White House did not respond to a request for comment about its plans for imposing new rules on hemp products in the coming months. But the Trump administration is expected to need more time than mid-December to finalize regulations, so hemp industry representatives are discussing a “regulatory bridge” that would impose temporary rules while continuing to avoid a full ban, according to Miller.
That could include restricting purchase to adults age 21 and older, blocking imports from China, mandating certain manufacturing practices, cracking down on copycat products that look like popular candy or potato chips and requiring transparency in product labeling.
While lawmakers have been back home over their summer break, hemp industry leaders have fanned out across the country to make their case for this plan. “The hemp industry does not have an August recess,” Christopher Lackner, head of the Hemp Beverage Alliance, said in an interview this month of the group’s work to facilitate passage of the Senate-passed funding bill.
Trump administration officials have also been telling reluctant lawmakers they will use the one-month delay to work on regulations. “The White House has committed to me that they’re committed to regulate the industry,” Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) said in an interview this month.
Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.), who fought in the Senate to retain the ban as originally intended, said White House officials have said “they don’t want another extension, and I agree with that.”
In a statement, Ricketts said that “manufactured high-THC products like gummies and drinks are putting our kids in the hospital” and need to be taken “off our shelves.”
Some supporters of the ban say the White House and industry are just employing delay tactics to get to December, when lawmakers will face another pressure campaign to delay the ban while they are motivated to avert a shutdown before leaving town for the holidays.
“What they’re really after is to try to jam this on some must-pass, end-of-the-year funding,” Budd told reporters earlier this month. “That’s really what this is about.”
Budd fought to block the delay in the Senate as part of the government funding measure, but his amendment to that end was shot down 61-32 before the chamberpassed the legislation, sending it on for House action.
Trump personally called Budd after the senator filed the amendment and talked about creating federal regulations for hemp products, according to a Senate aide granted anonymity to describe the private discussion.
Days later, Budd demanded a vote on the amendment anyway and continues to slam the hemp industry.
“It is clear that businesses that sell unregulated, intoxicating products will stop at nothing to protect their bottom line, even at the expense of children’s health and safety,” he said in a statement this week.
Besides lawmakers fighting to ban intoxicating hemp products, others are pushing alongside the White House and industry for federal regulations.
Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-W.Va.) has crafted legislation that would direct the Food and Drug Administration to create federal rules for intoxicating hemp products and wants to see mandates for third-party testing, as well as new THC limits per serving.
Griffith told reporters Thursday the “deadline push” in the Senate-passed government funding measure “is not long enough” to finalize necessary regulations.
Since state limits for THC vary widely throughout the country and the federal government has taken years to step in since the hemp loophole was created in 2018, Griffith argued it makes more sense to regulate the intoxicating products than to enact a federal ban.
“That horse is out of the barn,” he said. “What we need to do is corral it.”
Kelsey Brugger, Amanda Friedman and Rachel Shin contributed to this report.
President Donald Trump’s $400-million super PAC is taking its first steps into the general election: hosting a public event in battleground Michigan, headlined by Vice President JD Vance.
Battleground Republicans have been clamoring for Trump’s MAGA Inc. to spend in competitive races. The Michigan event is an early indicator of how the massive group might seek to use its funds to help the party keep control of Washington.
Vance will be joined in Sterling, Michigan, on Monday by GOP Senate nominee Mike Rogers, 10th District nominee Mike Bouchard Jr. and gubernatorial nominee John James, along with several other Michigan Republicans, according to an event advisory from MAGA Inc.
The GOP sees Michigan’s open seat as its best Senate pickup target this fall as Rogers faces former public health leader and progressive Abdul El-Sayed, who emerged from a grueling primary earlier this month.
“MAGA Inc. will be hosting events throughout the nation to ensure that Republicans retain control of Congress in order to finish cleaning up the mess the Biden-Harris-Pelosi-Schumer Democrats left,” said Alex Pfeiffer, spokesperson for MAGA Inc. “We’re not going back to their record inflation, open borders, and surging crime.”
MAGA Inc. is sitting on more funds than any other super PAC, and Republican donors and battleground candidates have been hoping it will unleash that money to help the party keep control of the House and Senate.
So far, the group has only spent only a few million dollars out of its massive fundraising haul, and its funds have largely gone to competitive Republican primaries. Most recently, it spent $827,000 on phone calls and text messages to boost Sen. Darline Graham (R-S.C.) in the state’s special primary.
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics2 years agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Politics2 years agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics2 years agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
The Dictatorship12 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words