PRIA Logo™
119-hr-6048119th CongressWALLET

NDO Fairness Act of 2025

Sponsored By: Representative Fitzgerald, Scott [R-WI-5]

Passed House

Summary

Court-authorized preclusion of notice would let judges order electronic communications and remote computing providers not to tell users when the government serves a warrant, order, or subpoena. It would also require annual, district-by-district reporting to Congress and public posting by the Department of Justice.

Personalized for You

How does this bill affect your finances?

Personalize government policy and PRIA will tell you what this bill means for your household, plus every other piece of legislation we track. PRIA reads each provision against your financial profile to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.

Free to download

Bill Overview

Analyzed Economic Effects

2 provisions identified: 1 benefits, 0 costs, 1 mixed.

Notice to customers after gag order ends

When a gag order ends, the government would have 5 business days to send you a copy of the warrant, order, or subpoena. It would deliver notice in at least two ways, such as personal service, mail, email, or another court-approved method. The notice would say what the inquiry was about, that your provider’s data was requested or shared, that a court blocked notice, which court did it, and the law used. You would have 180 days to ask for the records the government received; it would send them or certify that none were disclosed. It would not send illicit files or child-pornography/exploitation materials, and a court would allow only the redactions needed to protect an investigation.

Courts could delay notice of data warrants

This bill would let prosecutors ask a court to bar a provider from telling anyone about a warrant, order, or subpoena for your data. A judge would need written findings with specific facts that notice would risk life or safety, cause flight, destroy evidence, intimidate witnesses, or seriously harm the investigation, and there would be no less-restrictive option. Orders would last up to 1 year for child-pornography or child-exploitation cases and up to 90 days otherwise; 90-day extensions would need the same findings. Applications would say if you already know and if you are a suspect; providers would get the warrant and could tell only staff, their lawyers, or others a court allows, and those people would also be bound. Providers would be able to ask the court to change or end the order, and the court would be alerted within 14 days if circumstances change.

Sponsors & CoSponsors

Sponsor

Fitzgerald, Scott [R-WI-5]

WI • R

Cosponsors

  • Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-12]

    NY • D

    Sponsored 11/17/2025

Roll Call Votes

No roll call votes available for this bill.

View on Congress.gov
Back to Legislation