During a debate in spring 2024, Representative Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) opposed a proposal requiring warrants for searching foreign communications for intelligence on Americans, arguing that such a requirement would hinder national security efforts. His stance contributed to the defeat of the measure by a single vote, despite support from some progressives and civil liberties advocates.

The debate was framed within the context of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which allows the government to search foreign surveillance data for information on U.S. citizens. Critics argue that this practice often results in the collection of American communications without proper oversight, as evidenced by the FBI's reported 200,000 backdoor searches in 2022.

The Biden administration's lobbying efforts influenced several Democrats to retract their support for the warrant requirement, reflecting a broader tension between national security interests and civil liberties. This has raised concerns among advocates who fear that the lack of safeguards could lead to abuses of power, particularly with Donald Trump potentially regaining authority.

As the reauthorization of FISA approaches in April 2025, civil liberties advocates are preparing for renewed efforts to impose warrant requirements, especially in light of the Trump administration's previous actions that undermined privacy protections. The political landscape remains uncertain, with some Democrats indicating a shift in their positions on surveillance as they face challenges from more progressive candidates.

The ongoing debate highlights the complexities of balancing national security with the protection of civil liberties, particularly in an environment where executive power is increasingly scrutinized. Advocates continue to call for stronger protections against warrantless surveillance, emphasizing the need for accountability and transparency in government actions.