Privacy protections took center stage in Washington in 2025, as Senator Ted Cruz’s push for a multi‑year moratorium on state AI regulations drew sharp opposition from lawmakers and advocacy groups who warned it would preempt state privacy protections. [2] The Senate ultimately voted 99‑1 on July 1, 2025, to strip the moratorium from a major GOP bill amid bipartisan blowback. [1] Separately, a January 27 federal ruling held that warrantless Section 702 “backdoor” searches of Americans’ communications were unconstitutional, highlighting 57,000 US‑person searches in 2023 and intensifying calls for statutory warrant requirements to extend privacy protections. [4] A bipartisan Durbin‑Cramer warrant amendment then failed in the Senate by a 42‑50 vote. [5]

Key Takeaways

– Shows the Senate voted 99-1 on July 1, 2025 to remove a moratorium critics warned would preempt state privacy protections in AI rules. – Reveals a federal court cited 57,000 US‑person searches in 2023 to rule warrantless Section 702 ‘backdoor’ queries unconstitutional, spurring reform demands. – Demonstrates a bipartisan 42‑50 defeat for the Durbin‑Cramer warrant amendment, leaving Section 702 access without a statutory FISC warrant requirement. – Indicates Cruz sought a five‑year limit after a proposed 10‑year moratorium, drawing GOP objections and privacy advocates’ pushback over state preemption. – Suggests the fight will continue, as Cruz said on September 16 the AI moratorium is ‘not at all dead,’ pledging to revive it.

How Cruz’s AI push could limit privacy protections

Cruz, as chair of the Senate Commerce Committee, championed a multi‑year moratorium preventing states from enacting or enforcing AI rules—an approach privacy and civil‑rights advocates warned would preempt stronger state privacy protections and civil‑rights safeguards. [2] In the final hours before a key vote, Cruz reportedly floated a five‑year preemption compromise, but opposition—in part from fellow Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn—stiffened, and the Senate moved decisively to remove the moratorium. [1]

The scale of the rejection was striking: the chamber voted 99‑1 to strip the AI moratorium from a wide‑ranging GOP package on July 1, 2025. [1] Critics said federal preemption could freeze higher state standards at a moment when states are moving faster than Congress to set guardrails on data use and accountability, reducing on‑the‑ground privacy protections for residents. [2] The episode underscored how privacy protections have become intertwined with AI policy and federal‑state power dynamics. [2]

Court ruling amplifies urgency for broader privacy protections

On January 27, 2025, a federal court concluded the FBI’s warrantless “backdoor” searches of Americans’ communications under Section 702 violate the Fourth Amendment, spotlighting both constitutional concerns and the program’s scale. [4] The ruling noted more than 57,000 US‑person searches in 2023 alone, a data point privacy experts seized on to argue that Congress must enact a statutory warrant requirement to extend privacy protections to Americans’ communications. [4]

Digital rights groups, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, urged lawmakers to codify warrants before accessing Americans’ data collected under foreign intelligence authorities—arguing that court‑created guardrails are not enough to ensure durable privacy protections. [4] The decision intensified pressure on Congress to reconcile national security imperatives with clear, enforceable limits that protect Americans’ rights, a tension that spilled into the FISA reauthorization debate. [4]

The Senate math that shaped privacy protections in 2025

The first major vote came July 1, when the Senate overwhelmingly—99‑1—stripped a federal AI preemption plan from a GOP megabill. [1] Cruz had negotiated toward a five‑year limit on preemption after an earlier push for a longer moratorium, but bipartisan resistance grew, including from GOP Senator Marsha Blackburn, who raised concerns about curbing state authority. [1] Reporting described the preemption fight as a flashpoint for privacy protections, with civil‑rights groups warning the proposal would undermine states’ ability to guard against algorithmic harm and intrusive data practices. [2]

The second decisive vote arrived with the Durbin‑Cramer amendment, a narrowly tailored measure to require a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) warrant before accessing Americans’ communications collected under Section 702. [5] The amendment failed 42‑50, frustrating senators who argued their approach maintained core national‑security capabilities while adding a targeted warrant requirement to extend privacy protections for Americans. [5] The defeat left Congress without a statutory mandate for warrants, despite the court ruling and the volume of US‑person searches highlighted earlier in the year. [4][5]

Those two votes moved in opposite directions on privacy protections. On AI, senators rejected sweeping preemption that could have undercut state privacy safeguards, signaling space for state action. [1][2] On surveillance, however, the failure of the 42‑50 warrant amendment left Section 702 access largely intact, even after a court flagged constitutional defects and 57,000 US‑person queries in 2023. [4][5] The split outcomes show a Congress willing to preserve state flexibility on AI while remaining cautious about trimming national‑security authorities. [1][4]

What Cruz has promised next on privacy protections

Cruz has signaled the AI preemption fight is far from over. On September 16, he told POLITICO’s AI & Tech Summit the moratorium is “not at all dead,” arguing a uniform federal standard protects innovation and reduces compliance fragmentation. [3] Critics—including Senator Maria Cantwell—countered that his approach would erode state privacy protections and civil‑rights safeguards, urging Congress to pass comprehensive federal privacy legislation instead of blanket preemption. [3]

This sets up a renewed clash over how privacy protections should be structured: a single national model that could cap state ambition, or a federal baseline that lets states exceed it. [3] The stakes are substantial for consumers and companies alike, from disclosure and audit requirements to remedies when AI systems amplify bias or misuse personal data. [2][3] Whether the next iteration narrows preemption, carves out civil‑rights protections, or anchors to a broader privacy framework will determine its political viability. [3]

What’s at stake for Americans’ privacy protections

For everyday Americans, the stakes cut across both commercial AI and national security surveillance. On the AI front, preemption could decide whether states can enforce stronger privacy protections on data collection, model training, and algorithmic accountability—especially in sectors like hiring, housing, and credit. [2] On surveillance, a statutory warrant requirement would directly extend privacy protections by placing judicial oversight between intelligence databases and queries involving Americans’ data. [4][5]

The legislative record from 2025 quantifies the cross‑pressures: a 99‑1 vote against preemption indicates reluctance to curb states’ roles in privacy protections, while a 42‑50 vote against a warrant rule shows skittishness about tightening intelligence access. [1][5] Layered atop this is the court’s 57,000‑search figure, an empirical signal that privacy intrusions at scale require statutory guardrails. [4] As Cruz vows to revisit AI preemption, the durability of privacy protections will hinge on whether Congress pairs any federal standard with robust rights and remedies. [3]

Paths forward that align innovation and privacy protections

One path is a comprehensive federal privacy law setting a national floor—data minimization, access rights, enforcement—with room for states to exceed it, addressing critics of broad preemption. [3] Another is targeted federal AI legislation that bars certain high‑risk uses, mandates transparency for significant models, and sets accountability standards for sensitive domains, while deferring to states on stricter privacy protections. [2][3] On surveillance, Congress could adopt a narrow FISC‑warrant trigger for US‑person queries, codifying safeguards without disrupting foreign intelligence collection. [4][5]

The Senate’s 2025 votes provide a numeric roadmap: preserving state flexibility (99‑1) while calibrating surveillance oversight rather than leaving it solely to executive policy (42‑50). [1][5] Cruz’s insistence that preemption is “not at all dead” ensures the next round will test whether a compromise can protect innovation and strengthen privacy protections simultaneously—goals not inherently at odds if lawmakers anchor policy to measurable risk and rights. [3]

Sources:

[1] Reuters – US Senate strikes AI regulation ban from Trump megabill: www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-senate-strikes-ai-regulation-ban-trump-megabill-2025-07-01/” target=”_blank” rel=”nofollow noopener noreferrer”>https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-senate-strikes-ai-regulation-ban-trump-megabill-2025-07-01/

[2] The Washington Post – In dramatic reversal, Senate votes to kill AI-law moratorium: www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/07/01/ai-moratorium-big-beautiful-bill/” target=”_blank” rel=”nofollow noopener noreferrer”>https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/07/01/ai-moratorium-big-beautiful-bill/ [3] POLITICO – ‘Not at all dead’: Cruz says AI moratorium will return: https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/16/not-at-all-dead-cruz-says-ai-moratorium-will-return-00566369

[4] The Verge – Court rules warrantless Section 702 searches unconstitutional: www.theverge.com/2025/1/27/24353289/fbi-warrantless-backdoor-searches-unconstitutional-ruling” target=”_blank” rel=”nofollow noopener noreferrer”>https://www.theverge.com/2025/1/27/24353289/fbi-warrantless-backdoor-searches-unconstitutional-ruling [5] Office of Senator Kevin Cramer (press release) – Senator Cramer votes against FISA reauthorization after Fourth Amendment protections rejected: www.cramer.senate.gov/news/press-releases/senator-cramer-votes-against-fisa-reauthorization-legislation-after-fourth-amendment-protections-rejected” target=”_blank” rel=”nofollow noopener noreferrer”>https://www.cramer.senate.gov/news/press-releases/senator-cramer-votes-against-fisa-reauthorization-legislation-after-fourth-amendment-protections-rejected

Image generated by DALL-E 3