PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Dec 3, 2007
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Substitution Act of 2007 - Requires a federal or state court to substitute the United States for an electronic communication service provider with respect to any claim in a covered civil action if the Attorney General certifies to the court that either: (1) the service provider did not provide the alleged assistance; or (2) the assistance alleged to have been provided was in connection with an intelligence activity involving communications authorized by the President between September 11, 2001, and January 17, 2007, and designed to detect or prevent a terrorist attack, or activities in preparation for a terrorist attack, against the United States. Requires the alleged provider assistance to be described in a written request or directive from the Attorney General or the head of an element of the intelligence community to the electronic communication service provider indicating that the activity was authorized by the President and determined to be lawful.
Requires a federal or state court, upon receiving such a certification, to: (1) substitute the United States for the electronic communication service provider as the defendant as to all claims designated by the Attorney General in the certification; (2) dismiss all such designated claims against the provider; and (3) enter a final judgment relating to those claims.
Provides that the electronic communication service provider shall remain as a defendant if the Attorney General's certification states that not all of the alleged assistance was provided under a written request or directive.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Provides that, in a covered civil action in which the United States is substituted as a party-defendant, any plaintiff may serve third-party discovery requests to any electronic communications service provider as to which all claims are dismissed.
People & committees
Sen. Specter, Arlen [R-PA] · R–PA
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.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S14703-14704)
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: 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.2402 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.2402 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.2402 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.2402 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.