PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 240.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 20, 2009
USA PATRIOT Amendments Act of 2009 - Amends the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) to revise requirements relating to roving electronic surveillance, production of records for counterterrorism investigations, and use of pen registers and trap and trace devices (devices for recording incoming and outgoing telephone numbers).
Extends until December 31, 2013, provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act authorizing: (1) roving electronic surveillance; and (2) orders for the production of records for counterterrorism investigations.
Extends through 2013 audit requirements relating to orders for tangible things, pen registers and trap and trace devices, and the use of national security letters.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Amends the federal criminal code to reduce from 30 to 7 days the period for giving notice to the target of a search warrant in a criminal investigation.
National Security Letter Reform Act of 2009 - Terminates on December 31, 2013, the authority for issuance of national security letters.
Modifies the standard for issuing national security letters to require a separate writing documenting specific and articulable facts showing reasonable grounds to believe that the information sought pertains to a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power.
Requires notice to a recipient of a national security letter of the right of judicial review of any nondisclosure requirement. Requires the Attorney General to authorize use of any information obtained from a national security letter in a criminal investigation.
Sets forth procedures for judicial review of a national security letter nondisclosure order. Requires the Attorney General to establish minimization and destruction procedures for information obtained from a national security letter that is no longer of interest in an authorized investigation.
People & committees
Rep. Conyers, John, Jr. [D-MI-14] · D–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 240.
Committee on Financial Services discharged.
Committee on Financial Services discharged.
Committee on Intelligence (Permanent) discharged.
Committee on Intelligence (Permanent) discharged.
House Committee on Financial Services Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Jan. 29, 2010.
House Committee on Intelligence (Permanent) Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Jan. 29, 2010.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 111-382, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 111-382, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 16 - 10.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to House Financial Services
Referred to House Intelligence (Permanent)
Referred to House Judiciary
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Intelligence (Permanent Select), and Financial Services, 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: Apr 7, 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.3845 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.3845 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.3845 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.3845 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.