NDO Fairness Act Sets 90-Day Limit on Government Secrecy Orders for Your Digital Data

If you use email, social media, or any cloud service, the government can get a warrant or subpoena for your data. What you often don’t know is that the government can also get a court order preventing the service provider—like Google or Verizon—from telling you they did it. This is called a Nondisclosure Order (NDO). The NDO Fairness Act aims to put some guardrails around these secrecy orders, primarily by limiting their duration and requiring eventual notification.

This bill amends existing federal law (Section 2705(b) of title 18) to formalize when and how law enforcement can obtain a court order stopping an electronic service provider from notifying a customer that their information has been requested. The bill establishes a general limit: these secrecy orders can last for up to 90 days. For investigations involving child pornography or sexual exploitation, the order can last up to one year, provided the government notifies the court of a material change in circumstances. This is the bill drawing a clear line in the sand regarding how long the government can keep a data request secret.

The New Rules for Keeping Secrets

Currently, it’s often too easy for the government to get these NDOs. The NDO Fairness Act tightens this up by requiring the court to make specific written findings before granting an order. A judge can’t just sign off; they must find that not granting the order is likely to result in adverse outcomes, such as endangering life, flight from prosecution, destruction of evidence, or seriously jeopardizing an investigation. This forces law enforcement to show their work and justify the secrecy with articulable facts, which is a significant win for judicial oversight.

However, there’s a major carve-out for cases involving child pornography or sexual exploitation. In these serious cases, the court may presume that one of those adverse results is met and can issue the order without the detailed written decision otherwise required. While understandable given the nature of the crime, this presumption means that in a significant category of cases, the detailed judicial scrutiny is essentially waived, increasing the risk of rubber-stamping secrecy.

What Happens When the Secrecy Expires?

nOne of the most important changes for everyday users is the mandatory post-expiration notification. Once the non-disclosure order expires, the government must notify the targeted customer or subscriber within five business days. This notification must include a copy of the original warrant or subpoena and detail the nature of the law enforcement inquiry. If you request it within 180 days, the government must also provide a copy of the information they disclosed, unless that information is illegal material itself (like illicit records).

Why does this matter? If the government accessed your data improperly, you can’t challenge it if you don’t know about it. This mandatory notification—even if delayed—gives you a chance to seek legal counsel and challenge the underlying data request. For someone running a small business, or a journalist protecting sources, knowing that your data was accessed is the first step toward protecting your rights. The bill also gives service providers the right to challenge an NDO if they believe it’s unlawful or unreasonable, providing a check on government overreach before the data is even handed over.

The Transparency Report Card

The bill also introduces a requirement for the Attorney General to publish an annual report detailing the use of these secrecy orders across the country. This report must include the total number of customers targeted, the number of applications for NDOs, how many were granted or denied, and crucially, how many orders affected members of the news media. For the first time, we’ll get a public, aggregated look at how frequently the government is using these tools to keep investigations secret. This transparency is key for holding law enforcement accountable and understanding the true scope of digital surveillance.