Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Federal Government should drop all charges against Edward Snowden.

Bill Number

H.Res. 34

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Armed Forces and National Security

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-01-13: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), 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.

Last Updated

2025-02-06T15:23:25Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

This resolution (H. Res. 34) expresses the non-binding opinion of the U.S. House of Representatives that the National Security Agency's (NSA) bulk collection of Americans' telephone records was illegal and unconstitutional, that Edward Snowden's 2013 disclosures about the program served the public interest, and that the federal government should drop all criminal charges against him.

Key Provisions

• Background Context: The resolution cites several events, including:
• Director of National Intelligence James Clapper's 2013 Senate testimony, where he denied the NSA collected data on millions of Americans but later admitted it was incorrect.
• Snowden's June 2013 leaks to journalists revealing the NSA's bulk collection of phone records from telecom companies.
• Federal charges against Snowden under the Espionage Act (sections 793(d) and 798(a)(3)) and for theft of government property (18 U.S.C. § 641).
• A 2014 report by the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board stating the program did not aid in preventing terrorist plots and violated constitutional rights.
• Court rulings in 2015 (Second Circuit) and 2020 (Ninth Circuit) declaring the bulk collection unlawful and potentially unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment (which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures).
• The lack of accountability for those who conducted the collection, raising concerns about government overreach.
• Sense of the House: It declares that:
• The NSA's program was illegal and unconstitutional.
• Snowden's disclosures were in the public interest.
• The federal government should drop all charges against Snowden to protect whistleblowers who expose illegal government actions.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

This is a resolution, not a law, so it introduces no changes to existing statutes or policies. It does not amend the Espionage Act, the Patriot Act (which authorized some surveillance under Section 215), or any other legal framework. Instead, it urges future action without legal force.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: Could pressure the Department of Justice and intelligence community (e.g., NSA) to reconsider prosecutions of whistleblowers, though it has no binding effect. It highlights risks of unaccountable surveillance, potentially influencing internal reforms or oversight.
• On Citizens: Reinforces public debate on privacy rights, encouraging awareness of surveillance programs and the role of whistleblowers in protecting civil liberties. No direct impact on individual rights or data collection practices.
• On International Relations: Minimal direct effect, but Snowden's case has global implications for U.S. credibility on privacy and human rights; dropping charges could improve relations with allies concerned about U.S. surveillance abroad.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Edward Snowden: Directly benefits as the resolution calls for dropping charges against him for his leaks.
• Intelligence and Law Enforcement Agencies: Includes the NSA, Department of Justice, and Office of the Director of National Intelligence; they face implied criticism for past actions and potential scrutiny of whistleblower protections.
• Civil Liberties Advocates and Journalists: Groups like the ACLU or media outlets that supported Snowden's disclosures; the resolution validates their positions on transparency and public interest.
• U.S. Congress and Policymakers: Sponsors (Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Rep. Thomas Massie) and committees (Judiciary and Intelligence) are involved, signaling bipartisan interest in accountability.
• American Public: Broadly affected through ongoing discussions on government surveillance and privacy.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: References court rulings invalidating bulk collection under the Patriot Act and Fourth Amendment, but does not create new precedents. It underscores tensions between national security laws (like the Espionage Act) and whistleblower protections, without resolving them.
• Constitutional: Emphasizes violations of privacy rights under the Fourth Amendment, framing the NSA program as an abuse that demands accountability to prevent future overreach.
• Political: As a symbolic measure introduced in the 119th Congress (2025), it reflects partisan divides on surveillance and whistleblowers—potentially galvanizing debates during reauthorizations of intelligence laws. Referral to key committees suggests it could spark hearings, though passage is unlikely to mandate action. It promotes the view that whistleblowers exposing illegal acts should be shielded, influencing public and legislative discourse on government transparency.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Greene, Marjorie Taylor [R-GA-14]

Cosponsors (1)

Rep. Massie, Thomas [R-KY-4]

Recent Actions

• 2025-01-13: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), 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.
• 2025-01-13: Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select), 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.
• 2025-01-13: Submitted in House
• 2025-01-13: Submitted in House

Bill Versions

• Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Federal Government should drop all charges against Edward Snowden. — issued 2025-01-13 — PDF (3 pages)