PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1911-1912)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 29, 2000
Wireless Eavesdropping Protection Act of 2000 - Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit modifying any electronic communication device, equipment, or system in a manner which causes it to fail to comply with regulations governing electronic eavesdropping devices. Directs the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to prescribe regulations (and review and revise them when necessary in response to changes in technology and behavior) denying equipment authorization for any scanning receiver capable of: (1) receiving transmissions in frequencies allocated to the domestic cellular or personal communications service; (2) being readily altered to receive such transmissions; (3) being equipped with decoders that convert domestic cellular or personal communications service or protected specialized mobile radio service transmissions to analog voice audio, or which convert protected paging service transmissions to alphanumeric text; or (4) being equipped with devices that otherwise encode encrypted radio transmissions for purposes of unauthorized interception.Directs the FCC, with respect to scanning receivers capable of receiving transmissions in frequencies used by commercial mobile services and that are shared by public safety users, to examine methods and prescribe regulations to enhance the privacy of users of such frequencies. Requires tampering prevention measures and warning labels to be considered by the FCC in prescribing such regulations.Applies penalties for the unauthorized publication or use of electronic communications to the unauthorized receipt, intentional interception, or intentional divulgence of any such communication. Directs the FCC to investigate alleged violations and proceed to initiate action to impose forfeiture penalties.
People & committees
Sen. Wyden, Ron [D-OR] · D–OR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1911-1912)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1911)
Introduced in Senate
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: Sep 8, 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.2326 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.2326 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.2326 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.2326 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.