PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 26, 2013
FISA Court Oversight Underscoring Responsibility and Transparency Act or the FISA COURT Act - Amends the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) to require the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to consist of 11 publicly designated district court judges, of whom:
2 judges are designated by the President;
1 judge is designated by a majority of the Supreme Court; and
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
2 judges each are designated, respectively, by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the minority leader of the House of Representatives, and the majority and minority leaders of the Senate.
(Currently, the Chief Justice designates all 11 judges.)
Requires a majority of the Supreme Court (currently, the Chief Justice alone) to designate three judges from the U.S. district courts or courts of appeals who shall comprise the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review.
Requires the Attorney General (DOJ) to make publicly available: (1) copies of FISA court decisions, orders, pleadings, applications, and memoranda currently submitted to Congress, subject to the authority of the Attorney General to waive such public availability requirements for national security purposes; and (2) a quarterly estimate of the number of waivers along with the reasons for such waivers.
People & committees
Rep. Israel, Steve [D-NY-3] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3195 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3195 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3195 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3195 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.