PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 109-160.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Dec 30, 2005
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the House on December 22, 2005. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Amends the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001 to extend from December 31, 2005, to February 3, 2006, provisions of that Act and the "lone wolf" provision of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004. (The lone wolf provision redefined "agent of a foreign power" to permit issuance of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) orders targeting terrorists without a showing that they are members of a terrorist group or agents of such a group or of any other foreign power.)
People & committees
Sen. Sununu, John E. [R-NH] · R–NH
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 109-160.
Became Public Law No: 109-160.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Cleared for White House.
Senate agreed to House amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S14424; text as Senate agreed to House amendment: CR S14424)
Resolving differences -- Senate actions: Senate agreed to House amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S14424; text as Senate agreed to House amendment: CR S14424)
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.
RESERVATION OF OBJECTION - Mr. Obey raised the right to object to the consideration of S. 2167. Mr. Obey later withdrew his objection.
Mr. Sensenbrenner asked unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table and consider. (consideration: CR H13179-13181)
Received in the House.
Introduced in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR 12/22/2005 S14275-14281; text as passed Senate: CR 12/22/2005 S14281)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Introduced in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR 12/22/2005 S14275-14281; text as passed Senate: CR 12/22/2005 S14281)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Feb 10, 2026. 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 S.2167 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 S.2167 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 S.2167 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 S.2167 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.