PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 6, 2018
Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act or the CLOUD Act
This bill amends the federal criminal code to specify that an electronic communication service (ECS) or remote computing service (RCS) provider must comply with existing requirements to preserve, backup, or disclose the contents of an electronic communication or noncontent records or information pertaining to a customer or subscriber, regardless of whether the communication or record is located within or outside the United States.
An ECS or RCS provider may challenge a domestic warrant that compels disclosure of the contents of an electronic communication if:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
the customer or subscriber is not a U.S. citizen or national, lawful permanent resident, corporation, or other unincorporated entity;
the customer or subscriber does not reside in the United States; and
the required disclosure creates a material risk that the provider violates the laws of a foreign government with which the United States has in effect an executive agreement on data access.
In response to an order from a foreign government with which the United States has an executive agreement on data access, an ECS or RCS provider may:
intercept or disclose the contents of an electronic communication, and
disclose the contents of a stored electronic communication or noncontent records or information pertaining to a subscriber or customer.
It establishes a framework to allow the United States to enter into executive agreements with foreign governments to govern data access. To be valid, an executive agreement must meet certain requirements, including that the foreign government affords robust procedural privacy protections and adopts minimization procedures.
This bill does not preclude a foreign authority from obtaining assistance in a criminal investigation or prosecution.
People & committees
Sen. Hatch, Orrin G. [R-UT] · R–UT
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 the Judiciary.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 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.2383 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.2383 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.2383 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.2383 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.