PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 2, 2012
Electronic Communications Privacy Act Modernization Act of 2012 - Amends the federal criminal code to revise rules for requiring disclosure by a governmental entity of wire or electronic communications and for delaying notification of the issuance of a warrant requiring such disclosure. Extends such disclosure requirements to providers of a remote computing service. Permits disclosure by a service provider only pursuant to: (1) a warrant complying with the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and issued by a court with jurisdiction over the offense under investigation or equivalent state warrant, or (2) a court under title I or title VII of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.
Authorizes the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts to make rules regarding the content and form of reports required under this Act.
Requires the Attorney General to study trends relating to the frequency and effectiveness of the use of mobile tracking devices.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Revises reporting requirements for orders for pen registers and trap and trace devices to require issuing or denying judges to report specified information about such orders to the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts and to require the Director of such Office to report to Congress on such orders.
Amends the federal criminal code to allow individuals aggrieved by the interception of an electronic communication to move in court to suppress the content of any such communication (currently, allowed for wire or oral communications only).
People & committees
Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-8] · 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, and Homeland Security.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 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.6339 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.6339 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.6339 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.6339 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.