Stopping Executive Clearance Unfair Revocation Efforts Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 4237
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Armed Forces and National Security
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-06-27: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
- Last Updated
- 2025-07-29T21:11:46Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The SECURE Act (H.R. 4237) aims to clarify and strengthen due process protections in the procedures for denying or revoking eligibility for access to classified information. It expands these protections beyond just government employees and requires more detailed public reporting on such decisions to promote transparency and accountability.
Key Provisions
- Broadening Due Process Protections: Amends Section 801(a)(5) of the National Security Act of 1947 to apply certain procedural requirements (such as notice and appeal rights) to "individuals" rather than limiting them to "employees in the executive branch of Government." This ensures fair treatment in clearance decisions for a wider group.
- Enhanced Annual Reporting: Updates Section 506H(a)(1) of the National Security Act to mandate that the Director of National Intelligence include in an annual report:
- The number of security clearance denials or revocations at various levels (e.g., top secret, secret) during the prior fiscal year.
- For each denial or revocation: Identification of the federal agency or private-sector employer involved, an explanation of the reasons (e.g., based on background checks for risks like foreign influence or criminal history), and the outcome of any appeal or review process.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Expansion of Scope: Previously, due process rules under the National Security Act applied narrowly to executive branch employees. The bill extends these to all "individuals," potentially including contractors, private-sector workers, and others seeking clearances, making the law more inclusive.
- Increased Transparency in Reporting: The annual report, previously focused on general clearance processes, now requires specific, case-level details on denials and revocations, including reasons and appeal results. This shifts from aggregate data to more granular, accountable disclosures without revealing sensitive classified information.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: Federal departments and agencies (e.g., Department of Defense, intelligence community) will face a higher administrative burden to track and report detailed clearance actions, potentially leading to more standardized and justifiable decision-making processes.
- On Citizens and Individuals: Provides stronger safeguards for people applying for or holding security clearances, reducing the risk of arbitrary denials or revocations. This could benefit a broader range of workers in national security roles, including private contractors, by ensuring they receive explanations and appeal opportunities.
- On International Relations: No direct impacts are outlined, though clearer processes might indirectly support consistent handling of clearances involving foreign contacts or alliances.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Individuals with Security Clearances: Government employees, contractors, and private-sector applicants who may face denials or revocations, gaining enhanced rights to due process.
- Federal Agencies and Intelligence Community: Entities like the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and security clearance offices, responsible for implementing changes and submitting reports.
- Congress and Oversight Bodies: Committees such as Oversight and Government Reform, which receive the annual reports for monitoring executive branch actions.
- Private-Sector Employers: Companies involved in government contracts, as their employees' clearance issues will now be publicly detailed in reports.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal Implications: Reinforces procedural fairness in administrative decisions under the National Security Act, aligning with broader due process principles (e.g., right to notice and a hearing before adverse actions). This could reduce legal challenges to clearance revocations by standardizing explanations and appeals.
- Constitutional Implications: Supports Fifth Amendment due process protections by extending safeguards to non-employees, potentially addressing concerns about arbitrary executive actions in security matters without compromising national security.
- Political Implications: Increases congressional oversight of executive branch clearance processes, which could curb perceived politicization of decisions (e.g., targeting based on political views). The bill's bipartisan sponsorship highlights a focus on accountability in sensitive national security areas.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (13)
Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-36], Rep. Carson, André [D-IN-7], Rep. McClain Delaney, April [D-MD-6], Rep. Bera, Ami [D-CA-6], Rep. Tokuda, Jill N. [D-HI-2], Rep. Quigley, Mike [D-IL-5], Rep. Jayapal, Pramila [D-WA-7], Rep. Subramanyam, Suhas [D-VA-10], Rep. Beyer, Donald S. [D-VA-8], Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank" [D-GA-4], Rep. Krishnamoorthi, Raja [D-IL-8], Rep. Torres, Norma J. [D-CA-35], Rep. Casten, Sean [D-IL-6]
Recent Actions
- 2025-06-27: Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
- 2025-06-27: Introduced in House
- 2025-06-27: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Stopping Executive Clearance Unfair Revocation Efforts Act — issued 2025-06-27 — PDF (3 pages)