Skip to content
CIVIC HERALD
HR 9016 · 119th Congress · HouseIn committee

Email Privacy Act

  1. May 22, 2026Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
  2. May 22, 2026Introduced in House
  3. May 22, 2026Introduced in House
Provisionalunreviewed: impact, issue tags, provisions, stakeholders
People affectedThe bill applies to all users of email and cloud storage services in the U.S., which is a very large population, but the text does not name a specific count; not determinable from the text provided.
Fiscal magnitudeno CBO estimate published
Reach42provisional — pending reviewrigor: heuristic llm
Your matchSign in →See how this aligns with your values.

What it does

The provisions, in plain language.

  1. Expands the federal ban on unauthorized disclosure of stored communications to cover data that is 'stored, held, or maintained' by an email or cloud provider — not just data 'while in electronic storage' — so that older messages and cloud-held files get the same legal protection as newly received messages.

    Sec. 2(a) (amending 18 U.S.C. § 2702(a))provisional
  2. Requires government agencies to obtain a search warrant from a court before compelling any email or cloud storage provider to hand over the contents of stored wire or electronic communications, regardless of how long the messages have been stored — eliminating the prior rule that allowed agencies to use an administrative subpoena for messages older than 180 days.

    Sec. 2(b) and Sec. 3 (amending 18 U.S.C. § 2703(a) and striking the 180-day subpoena provision)provisional
  3. Extends the warrant requirement to remote computing services (cloud platforms) as well as traditional electronic communication services, so all cloud-held content must be obtained through a court-issued warrant.

    Sec. 2(b) (amending 18 U.S.C. § 2703(a), (c))provisional
  4. Allows a warrant to specify a deadline by which the provider must respond; if no deadline is stated, the provider must respond promptly.

    Sec. 2(b) (amending 18 U.S.C. § 2703(a))provisional
  5. Preserves lawful consent of the account holder (subscriber or customer) as a valid basis for a provider to disclose communications without a warrant.

    Sec. 2(b) (amending 18 U.S.C. § 2703(c)(1)(C))provisional

Who it affects

Who it helps · who it burdens.

Who it helps

  • Email and cloud storage usersAll people who store messages or files with email or cloud providers gain stronger privacy protection: government agencies must now obtain a court warrant — not just an administrative subpoena — before accessing stored communications, regardless of age. Provisions 1 and 2 directly extend this protection.provisional
  • Email and cloud service providersProviders gain a clearer legal framework: they may lawfully refuse government requests that lack a warrant, reducing their exposure to disclosure demands that lack judicial oversight. Provisions 2 and 3 establish the warrant standard they may invoke.provisional

Who it burdens

  • Government law-enforcement and investigative agenciesAgencies must now obtain a court-issued search warrant — rather than an administrative subpoena or court order — to compel disclosure of stored email and cloud content, adding a judicial authorization step to investigations. Provisions 2 and 3 impose this requirement.provisional

Dollar-level funding (FEC sector totals) — coming in a later phase.

Issues

What this bill touches.

Security vs. privacy+58Personal data & privacy+52Regulation (cross-sector)+28

The sign shows the bill's direction on each issue (+ toward, − away); the number is its magnitude. Color never encodes good or bad, and never party.

The original text

Read it for yourself.

4,156 characters of primary source text.

Checking your session…