A Top Democrat Is Urging Colleagues to Support Trump’s Spy Machine | WIREDSkip to main contentMenuSECURITYPOLITICSTHE BIG STORYBUSINESSSCIENCECULTUREREVIEWSMenuAccountAccountNewslettersSecurityPoliticsThe Big StoryBusinessScienceCultureReviewsChevronMoreExpandThe Big InterviewMagazineEventsWIRED InsiderWIRED ConsultingNewslettersPodcastsVideoLivestreamsMerchSearchSearchDell CameronSecurityMar 20, 2026 4:46 PMA Top Democrat Is Urging Colleagues to Support Trump’s Spy MachineCongressman Jim Himes claims a sweeping surveillance authority should stay intact because he hasn't seen abuses by Kash Patel's FBI, according to internal messaging obtained by WIRED.Photograph: Daniel Heuer/Getty ImagesCommentLoaderSave StorySave this storyCommentLoaderSave StorySave this storyUnited States congressman Jim Himes, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, is privately lobbying colleagues to preserve the FBI’s power to conduct warrantless searches of Americans’ communications, WIRED has learned, arguing that he has seen no evidence that the Trump administration is abusing its authority.In a letter obtained by WIRED, Himes urges fellow Democrats to support the White House’s request to renew a controversial surveillance program that intercepts the electronic data of foreigners abroad. While targeted at foreigners, the program—authorized under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act—also sweeps in vast quantities of private messages belonging to US citizens.Himes’ pitch relies on the “56 reforms” passed by Congress in 2024, which codified the FBI’s own internal protocols as a substitute for constitutional warrants. In the letter, Himes claims these changes are “working as intended” to prevent domestic misuse, citing a compliance rate “exceeding 99 percent” over the past two years.The structural foundations of that defense, however, have been fundamentally altered by recent changes within the FBI. Himes’ “99 percent” compliance metric was produced by the Office of Internal Auditing, for instance—a unit that long served as a smoke alarm designed to detect illegality, but no longer exists.The unit was shuttered by FBI director Kash Patel last year. Historic court opinions based on its data had previously exposed hundreds of thousands of improper FBI searches. Without the auditors required to calculate failure rates, the compliance mechanisms Himes points to have effectively ceased to function.In a statement, Himes’ office largely reiterated the positions laid out in his letter to colleagues. “I am open to making further reforms to Section 702, building on the many successful reforms we made in reauthorization legislation two years ago,” he says. “A short-term reauthorization of Section 702 will enable Congress to thoroughly debate the pros and cons of these suggested reforms—and to determine if compromise is possible—without placing our national security in peril by allowing the program to expire.”As a member of the so-called Gang of Eight—a bipartisan group of lawmakers who are briefed on highly sensitive classified information—Himes possesses some of the deepest knowledge of the spy program. Nevertheless, his letter contains several other claims that appear fundamentally at odds with the mechanics of FISA oversight.“Because of how heavily it is overseen by all three branches of government,” Himes says, “any effort to misuse the program would almost certainly become known to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and to Congress.”The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court is a secret court that possesses no investigative arm to audit FBI databases. Similar to Congress, its oversight role is purely reactive, relying entirely on the US Justice Department to self-report violations.“Neither Congress nor the FISA Court conducts independent audits of the FBI’s queries,” says Liza Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program. “They rely on the Department of Justice to conduct thorough audits and to report the results truthfully and promptly. This particular Department of Justice has gutted internal oversight mechanisms and has been rebuked by dozens of federal courts for providing inaccurate, misleading, or incomplete information.”There are no judges standing between the FBI and the private communications of millions of Americans, something that Himes and other members of his committee claim is necessary for the government to react quickly to terrorist threats. Critics argue that, given the current administration’s efforts to dismantle internal checks at the FBI, this is a massive vulnerability, leaving Americans exposed to surveillance abuses that will take years to declassify—if they’re ever reported at all.No members of Congress are actively calling to end the 702 program; even its harshest critics acknowledge its intelligence value. Proponents of constitutional guardrails have also accounted for the need to react quickly: Bills that mandate a warrant for American data—like the recently introduced Government Surveillance Reform Act—consistently feature broad emergency carve-outs.Under that bill, if a threat is imminent or lives are at stake, agents can still quickly access the necessary intelligence without a judge’s approval. It also includes defensive cybersecurity exceptions that allow the government to search for malicious code or infrastructure without a warrant.Under the proposed privacy reforms, the FBI would be barred from running warrantless searches through American data simply to look for spies. Because espionage is a slow-moving and rarely violent threat, agents would need to go to court and present evidence in advance.Got a Tip?Are you a current or former government employee who wants to talk about surveillance of US residents? We'd like to hear from you. Using a nonwork phone or computer, contact the reporter securely on Signal at dell.3030.Current safeguards rely on FBI attorneys and supervisors to approve sensitive searches. But under last year’s overhaul of the federal workforce, personnel in those legal and management tiers were stripped of key civil service protections. Failing to “implement administrative policies” is now a fireable offense.The change has effectively neutralized the independence of the bureau’s middle management, which has been further gutted by politically motivated firings that—according to a federal lawsuit filed by former high-ranking FBI officials—Patel privately acknowledged were “likely illegal.”As a consequence, the "high-level approval" Himes cites as a key shield against abuse now exists as a mechanism for political loyalists to promote domestic surveillance targets that align with the administration’s agenda.Himes addressed those concerns, writing to colleagues: “We fundamentally lack faith in Trump administration leaders. The administration has shown an appalling willingness to violate laws and flout norms in both foreign and domestic affairs.” He adds that were he aware of the administration abusing its surveillance authority, he would not urge members to reauthorize the program. “I have not seen evidence of misuse, despite being on the lookout for any hint of it,” he said.Recent public disclosures from 2025 and 2026 detail a series of FBI surveillance abuses and oversight violations. According to a FISA court opinion released last fall, FBI personnel deployed a tool that conducted searches of Americans’ data that were never logged or audited. Notably, the incident occurred after the reforms touted by Himes. In October, the Justice Department’s own inspector general’s office noted in a report that, “in view of the history of the FBI’s Section 702 compliance issues, we are not able to conclude based on that limited time period that the FBI’s querying compliance issues are entirely in the past.”The current administration has also raided the homes of journalists, infiltrated chat groups of activists tracking immigration raids, and redirected counterterrorism resources toward domestic political groups.As recently as last month, Himes skipped Trump’s State of the Union address, posting on Facebook that the president and “his administration are blatantly corrupt, [have] shattered our democratic norms, and broken precedent time and time again.”In 2024, Himes and other surveillance hawks successfully convinced Congress to reject the inclusion of any constitutional guardrails in the 702 program. Both he and the bureau—then led by Christopher Wray—argued that requiring high-level supervisor approval for sensitive searches was all that was needed to prevent rogue agents from abusing the system.While Himes’ letter cites “56 reforms” implemented two years ago, not all of them apply to the FBI’s access. Of those that do, a significant number are aimed at simply adding internal bureaucratic friction to the process, making it administratively tedious for rank-and-file agents to execute a search. The FBI says this was accomplished by limiting the pool of people legally allowed to do so by roughly 90 percent.At the same time, a former FBI deputy director, Paul Abbate, issued a 2024 directive urging agents to actively run queries on Americans to justify the program’s existence, as WIRED first reported.The remaining reforms cited by Himes include the use of permission slips: the requirement that a deputy FBI director approve searches targeting elected officials, journalists, and religious leaders. Congress further requires the agents to type a justification into a text box and perform an additional mouse click to “opt in” before a search.The process is enforced by the FBI’s own system administrators and was implemented because the bureau has consistently attributed improper searches to agents it claims were unaware that they were accessing wiretap data.Himes’ letter goes on to say that “because of how Section 702 is structured, it is not an especially good vehicle for abuse.” But the program’s history is rife with abuse.“According to the government’s own audits, FBI agents have searched for the communications of members of Congress, protesters from across the political spectrum, journalists, and congressional campaign donors,” says Goitein.The Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) voted this week to formally oppose reauthorization without reforms, binding its 98 members to vote no on a clean extension of the 702 program. In a statement, CPC chair Greg Casar said Democrats should not be “handing them massive surveillance powers they will abuse.”Representative Pramila Jayapal, a Judiciary Committee member and longtime privacy advocate, warned that the Trump administration has already demonstrated a willingness to use surveillance tools against domestic political targets, citing the Justice Department’s apparent monitoring of lawmakers’ search histories during the review of the Jeffrey Epstein files.Despite those warnings, congressional sources say Himes is currently seeking approval from Democratic leadership to cut a deal with Republicans to pass a clean reauthorization, asking for nothing in return."I think it's incredibly dumb for Democrats to give away leverage," one congressional staffer familiar with the negotiations said on the condition of anonymity. "Especially on a bill that is very controversial, given all the domestic spying by this administration."CommentsBack to topTriangleYou Might Also LikeIn your inbox: Upgrade your life with WIRED-tested gearNvidia plans to launch an open-source AI agent platformBig Story: He built the Epstein database—it consumed his lifeShould you leave your phone charging overnight?Watch: How right wing influencers infiltrated the governmentDell Cameron is an investigative reporter from Texas covering privacy and national security. He's the recipient of multiple Society of Professional Journalists awards and is co-recipient of an Edward R. Murrow Award for Investigative Reporting. Previously, he was a senior reporter at Gizmodo and a staff writer for the Daily ... Read MoreSenior Reporter, National SecurityTopicsFBIsurveillanceprivacyDonald TrumpPolicypoliticsNational Security AgencyRead MoreUS Lawmakers Move to Kill the FBI’s Warrantless Wiretap AccessA bipartisan bill would force the FBI to get a warrant to read Americans’ messages and ban the federal purchase of commercial data on US residents ahead of a critical April deadline.Dell CameronDHS Ousts CBP Privacy Officers Who Questioned ‘Illegal’ OrdersDepartment of Homeland Security leaders removed top privacy officers who objected to mislabeling government records to block their public release, WIRED has learned.Dell CameronHow Federal Agencies Got Caught Up in Trump's Anti-Immigration CrusadeWIRED spoke with workers across seven government agencies—from the IRS to HUD—about how their work has been contorted to support ICE and other immigration efforts.Vittoria ElliottThe Controversies Finally Caught Up to Kristi NoemDonald Trump said he would replace the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. Noem’s tenure was marked by aggressive anti-immigration tactics and ICE and CBP’s killing of two US protesters.Dell CameronDHS Wants a Single Search Engine to Flag Faces and Fingerprints Across AgenciesHomeland Security aims to combine its face and fingerprint systems into one big biometric platform—after dismantling centralized privacy reviews and key limits on face recognition.Dell CameronData Broker Breaches Fueled Nearly $21 Billion in Identity-Theft LossesA report copublished by WIRED sparked a probe into opt-out pages hidden by data brokers. Now congressional Democrats say breaches tied to the industry have cost people tens of billions of dollars.Dell CameronAll the Ways Big Tech Fuels ICE and CBPA WIRED analysis shows that ICE and CBP have collectively spent at least $515 million on products from Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Palantir in the last few years alone.Caroline HaskinsHow Vulnerable Are Computers to an 80-Year-Old Spy Technique? Congress Wants AnswersA pair of US lawmakers are calling for an investigation into how easily spies can steal information based on devices’ electromagnetic and acoustic leaks—a spying trick the NSA once codenamed TEMPEST.Andy GreenbergHere’s What a Google Subpoena Response Looks Like, Courtesy of the Epstein FilesThe US Justice Department disclosures give fresh clues about how tech companies handle government inquiries about your data.Maddy VarnerLeading US Research Lab Appears to Be Squeezing Out Foreign ScientistsHouse Democrats are demanding answers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology and urging it to halt rumored changes they say could undermine its mission.Paresh DaveMetadata Exposes Authors of ICE’s ‘Mega’ Detention Center PlansComments and other data left on a PDF detailing Homeland Security’s proposal to build “mega” detention and processing centers reveal the personnel involved in its creation.Maddy VarnerSupreme Court Rules Most of Donald Trump’s Tariffs Are IllegalIn a 6-3 ruling, justices upended the Trump administration’s signature economic policy, potentially putting the US government on the hook for at least $175 billion in tariff refunds.Zeyi YangWIRED is obsessed with what comes next. Through rigorous investigations and game-changing reporting, we tell stories that don’t just reflect the moment—they help create it. When you look back in 10, 20, even 50 years, WIRED will be the publication that led the story of the present, mapped the people, products, and ideas defining it, and explained how those forces forged the future. WIRED: For Future Reference.More From WIREDSubscribeNewslettersLivestreamsTravelFAQWIRED StaffWIRED EducationEditorial StandardsArchiveRSSSite MapAccessibility HelpReviews and GuidesReviewsBuying GuidesStreaming GuidesWearablesCouponsGift GuidesAdvertiseContact UsManage AccountJobsPress CenterCondé Nast StoreUser AgreementPrivacy PolicyYour California Privacy Rights© 2026 Condé Nast. All rights reserved. WIRED may earn a portion of sales from products that are purchased through our site as part of our Affiliate Partnerships with retailers. The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Condé Nast. Ad ChoicesSelect international siteUnited StatesLargeChevronItaliaJapónCzech Republic & SlovakiaFacebookXPinterestYouTubeInstagramTiktok

Jim Himes, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, is privately advocating for the preservation of the FBI’s surveillance authority, specifically Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, despite concerns regarding potential abuses. According to a WIRED report obtained through internal messaging, Himes’ stance is rooted in his assertion that he has not observed any misuse of this authority by the Trump administration, particularly under the leadership of Kash Patel’s FBI. His strategy relies heavily on the “56 reforms” enacted in 2024, which codified the FBI’s internal protocols as a substitute for traditional judicial warrants. These reforms, he claims, are functioning effectively, supported by a reported compliance rate exceeding 99 percent over the past two years. However, a critical element of this defense – the Office of Internal Auditing – was dismantled by Patel, effectively eliminating a mechanism for monitoring compliance and detecting potential wrongdoing.

Himes’ argument centers on the extensive oversight afforded to Section 702 by multiple government branches, including the judiciary and the Department of Justice, suggesting that any attempt at abuse would inevitably be detected. He claims the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, lacking investigative capabilities, relies solely on the Justice Department for reporting violations, a system he believes provides sufficient safeguards. This position, however, is sharply contrasted by experts like Liza Goitein, who argue that DOJ’s oversight mechanisms have been deliberately weakened, and that the reliance on self-reporting creates significant vulnerabilities. Goitein and others criticize the current structure as providing no judicial oversight capable of auditing the FBI's queries, leaving American citizens exposed to potential surveillance without corrective measures.

Himes’ actions are part of a broader effort to maintain the functionality of the surveillance program, arguing that its expiration would jeopardize national security, particularly in the face of potential terrorist threats. While acknowledging the need for rapid responses, he contends that the existing framework, bolstered by the “56 reforms,” is sufficient to prevent abuse. Despite this, recent public disclosures in 2025 and 2026 revealed specific instances of FBI surveillance abuses, including unlogged and un-audited searches, occurring after the reforms were implemented. The Inspector General’s office noted the historical compliance issues with Section 702, indicating that the program’s monitoring mechanisms remain unreliable.

Furthermore, Himes’ actions come against a backdrop of increasing concerns regarding the administration’s broader surveillance practices, including raids on journalists and infiltration of activist groups. The Congressional Progressive Caucus, for instance, has formally opposed reauthorization without significant reforms, recognizing the potential for abuse. Despite this, Himes is pursuing a bipartisan agreement to reauthorize Section 702 on a short-term basis, citing the need for congressional debate without risking national security. However, critics, such as Representative Pramila Jayapal and others, express strong reservations, warning that the administration's efforts to dismantle internal checks at the FBI create a dangerous vulnerability. Himes' reliance on bureaucratic friction within the FBI, such as requiring deputy FBI director approval for sensitive searches, is viewed as a primarily procedural measure rather than a robust safeguard. His belief that the program is “not an especially good vehicle for abuse” is directly challenged by evidence of past abuses and ongoing concerns about the department's lack of accountability. Ultimately, Himes’ actions underscore a delicate balance between national security concerns, privacy rights, and the potential for governmental overreach, leaving a considerable degree of uncertainty surrounding the future of this highly controversial surveillance program.