Protecting Data at the Border Act
Latest action · Apr 26, 2017 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Progress
Where this bill reached, and when. A stage with no date was not reached; one that failed a vote and later carried shows the date it carried.
- IntroducedApr 4, 2017
- Passed HouseNot reached
- Passed SenateNot reached
- To the PresidentNot reached
- Became lawNot reached
Summary
Protecting Data at the Border Act
This bill prohibits a governmental entity from: (1) accessing the digital contents of electronic equipment belonging to, or in the possession of, a U.S. person (person) at the border without a valid warrant; or (2) denying a person's U.S. entry or exit based on the person's refusal to disclose an access credential or in order to determine whether such person will consensually provide an access credential, access, or online account information.
A border officer may access the digital contents of electronic equipment without a warrant if the officer determines that an emergency situation exists. The officer must subsequently apply for a warrant within seven days, and if such warrant is not granted: (1) digital content copies must be destroyed, (2) digital contents or information may not be disclosed, and (3) the person shall be notified of such destruction.
A governmental entity may not make or retain a copy of the digital contents of electronic equipment, an online account, or online account information without probable cause to believe that such information contains evidence of, or constitutes the fruits of, a crime.
Unlawfully accessed information: (1) must be destroyed and the person notified of its destruction; (2) may not be disclosed; and (3) may not be received in evidence in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding.
A governmental entity shall keep a record of each instance in which it obtains access to an individual's digital information.
A governmental entity may not seize electronic equipment belonging to, or in the possession of, a person at the border without probable cause to believe that such equipment contains information relevant to a felony.
Cosponsors 24
Members who signed on, in the order they did. Signatures ran from Apr 4, 2017 to Jan 3, 2018; 3 are original cosponsors, there from the day it was introduced.
| Seat | Cosponsor | Signed on | |
|---|---|---|---|
| D-WA | Adam Smith | Original | Apr 4, 2017 |
| R-TX | Blake Farenthold | Original | Apr 4, 2017 |
| D-VA | Donald S. Beyer, Jr. | Original | Apr 4, 2017 |
| D-IL | Bobby L. Rush | Apr 5, 2017 | |
| D-TN | Steve Cohen | Apr 12, 2017 | |
| D-HI | Tulsi Gabbard | Apr 12, 2017 | |
| D-OR | Earl Blumenauer | Apr 24, 2017 | |
| D-DC | Eleanor Holmes Norton | Apr 24, 2017 | |
| D-MD | Jamie Raskin | Apr 24, 2017 | |
| D-IL | Luis V. Gutierrez | Apr 24, 2017 | |
| D-WA | Pramila Jayapal | Apr 24, 2017 | |
| D-WA | Suzan K. DelBene | Apr 24, 2017 | |
| D-WA | Derek Kilmer | Apr 26, 2017 | |
| D-TX | Marc A. Veasey | Apr 26, 2017 | |
| D-CA | Mark DeSaulnier | Apr 28, 2017 | |
| D-CA | Ted Lieu | Apr 28, 2017 | |
| D-CO | Diana DeGette | Jun 20, 2017 | |
| D-RI | David N. Cicilline | Jun 26, 2017 | |
| D-CA | Zoe Lofgren | Jul 27, 2017 | |
| D-OR | Peter A. DeFazio | Sep 5, 2017 | |
| D-IL | Janice D. Schakowsky | Sep 11, 2017 | |
| D-NY | Adriano Espaillat | Sep 12, 2017 | |
| D-NH | Carol Shea-Porter | Oct 23, 2017 | |
| D-CA | Mark Takano | Jan 3, 2018 |
Committees 2
Where it was sent and what each committee and subcommittee did with it, in order.
| Chamber | Committee | What it did |
|---|---|---|
| House | Judiciary Committee | Referred Apr 4, 2017 |
| Crime and Federal Government Surveillance Subcommittee | Referred Apr 26, 2017 | |
| House | Homeland Security Committee | Referred Apr 4, 2017 |
| Border Security and Enforcement Subcommittee | Referred Apr 17, 2017 |
Actions 4
Everything that happened, newest first.
- Apr 26, 2017Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
- Apr 17, 2017Referred to the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security.
- Apr 4, 2017Introduced in House
- Apr 4, 2017Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Homeland Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Research
What has been written about this bill: committee reports, cost estimates, the sponsor’s authority statement, printed hearings and the Congressional Research Service’s work.
Constitutional authority
The sponsor’s statement, as printed in the Congressional Record, vol. 163, no. 58, April 4, 2017, page H2698.
Related bills 1
Companion bills and other measures the record links to this one.
| Bill | Title | Relationship | Latest action |
|---|---|---|---|
| S 823 | Protecting Data at the Border Act | Identical bill | Jul 11, 2018 |
Titles 2
Every title it has carried, official and short, at each stage.
- Official Title as Introduced
- To ensure the digital contents of electronic equipment and online accounts belonging to or in the possession of United States persons entering or exiting the United States are adequately protected at the border, and for other purposes.
- Short Titles as Introduced
- Protecting Data at the Border Act
Subjects
Assigned by the Library of Congress. Policy area: Immigration.
- Border security and unlawful immigration
- Computers and information technology
- Congressional oversight
- Criminal investigation, prosecution, interrogation
- Department of Homeland Security
- Digital media
- Evidence and witnesses
- Government information and archives
- Immigration
- Immigration status and procedures
- Racial and ethnic relations
- Right of privacy
- Telephone and wireless communication
Text 1
Each version as it was printed, newest first.
- Apr 4, 2017Introduced in House
Everything here is as published by Congress: the summary is the Congressional Research Service's, the action wording is the clerks', and the subjects are the Library of Congress's. How far it got is read from the actions themselves, taking the most recent one of each kind, so a bill that failed a vote and later passed is shown as having passed. Records come from this bill on Congress.gov and govinfo.gov; cost estimates are the Congressional Budget Office's, and the hearings are the printed hearings GovInfo publishes, which can appear months after the hearing.
