In America: How One Florida Republican’s Push To Repeal the Patriot Act Sparked Debate Over Surveillance and Liberties
Two decades after 9/11, Luna’s bill forces a reckoning: Can America balance security and civil liberties in an era of surveillance and geopolitical unrest?
A Bold Move? Or Friendly Fire?
On May 7, 2025, Florida Republican Representative Anna Paulina Luna introduced the American Privacy Restoration Act, a one-page bill seeking to fully repeal the USA PATRIOT Act, the controversial surveillance law enacted after 9/11.
Luna, a member of the far-right House Freedom Caucus and a staunch ally of President Donald Trump, framed the legislation as a strike against the “deep state”. She accuses intelligence agencies of abusing Patriot Act powers to erode Fourth Amendment protections. “It’s past time to rein in our intelligence agencies and restore the right to privacy,” she declared in a press release.
The move has gained attention because it is both significant and contradictory. A lawmaker who supports Trump is challenging a law that Trump allies have historically defended and that Trump himself has used.
Anna Paulina Luna – The MAGA Maverick?
Following her election in 2022, Luna has earned a reputation for being outspoken in the GOP. Formerly of the US Air Force and Social Media stardom, she has peddled far-right conspiracies, including UFOs, COVID-19’s origins, and the 9/11 attack itself.
Her voting record aligns with Trump’s “America First” agenda: she voted against certifying the 2020 election results, supported impeachment efforts against Biden administration officials like Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, and opposed bipartisan spending deals
Yet her push to repeal the Patriot Act places her in rare alignment with progressive civil liberties groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). “Luna’s attention to the issue puts her in line with some individuals and organizations with which she would not typically be aligned,” noted Florida Politics.
The USA Patriot Act – a post-9/11 legacy under fire
Passed just 45 days after 9/11 with minimal debate, The USA Patriot Act expanded federal surveillance powers to unprecedented levels. It allowed warrantless wiretaps, secret “sneak and peek” searches, and bulk data collection under Section 215, which enabled the NSA to harvest phone records of millions of Americans. While supporters argued that these tools were critical to preventing terrorism, critics warned of systemic overreach.
Former Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI), the lone Senate vote against the act in 2001, later wrote: “My fears [about civil rights] have come to pass over the past 20 years, and our country has yet to fully reckon with the discriminatory impact of the Patriot Act on communities of color”. Most recently satirized by comedians like Ramy Youssef and Hasan Minhaj, surveillance of Muslim Americans at Mosques became synonymous with the Patriot Act in the post-9/11 world.
Liberties at stake: The Abuse of the Patriot Act
The ACLU continues to denounce the law as a tool for enabling unjust mass surveillance. Edward Snowden, an NSA whistleblower, leaked in 2013 that section 215 of the act authorized the NSA’s bulk data collection program. A US Appeals court deemed this to have been illegal in 2015. Other provisions, like Section 213 (“sneak and peek”), allowed delayed notification of searches, while Section 206 permitted roving wiretaps without specifying targets.
SOURCE - ACLU.ORG“The Patriot Act gave the government entry into our private lives, treating everyone as a suspect,” the ACLU stated. Over 380 cities and four states passed resolutions opposing its provisions, reflecting widespread public distrust.
From Hassoun to College Campuses: Modern Weaponization
The Trump administration’s 2019–2020 use of the Patriot Act to detain Adham Amin Hassoun, a Palestinian convict, highlights its enduring risks. Hassoun, imprisoned for funding pre-9/11 charities linked to extremists, faced indefinite detention under Section 412 after serving his sentence. With no country willing to accept him, ICE invoked the Patriot Act to label him a perpetual national security threat.
This precedent raises alarms about the law’s potential misuse of protestors. During Trump’s last presidency, critics warned that broad “domestic terrorism” definitions in the Patriot Act could criminalize activists, including student protesters. Hassoun’s detention highlights how the law’s vague powers allow long sentences without due process.
Why Is a Trump Loyalist Challenging the Security State?
Luna’s bill has sparked intrigue: Why would a MAGA Republican risk clashing with intelligence agencies and GOP leadership? Some speculate it reflects growing libertarian-leaning skepticism of government overreach within the GOP’s base. The Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, praised Luna for recognizing that “the Bill of Rights contains no ‘national security’ exception.”
Others see political maneuvering. Luna’s rhetoric aligns with Trump’s “deep state” narrative, framing intelligence agencies as rogue actors. This theme resonates with many of the conservatives, who are distrustful of the FBI after its Trump-Russia investigations. Yet repealing the Patriot Act could complicate Trump’s immigration agenda, which relies on expansive surveillance tools to track & deport undocumented migrants.
A Fractured Congress? The Road Ahead for Luna’s Bill
The American Privacy Restoration Act faces steep odds. Congressional leaders in both parties have historically supported Patriot Act renewals, and Luna’s progressive allies remain wary of her motives. “Luna does not have the sole authority to eliminate the Patriot Act,” said a skeptic to Florida Politics.
Still, the bill has energized privacy advocates. “New Yorkers are unwilling to sacrifice liberty for a false sense of security,” said Donna Lieberman of the NYCLU, echoing calls for reform. Whether Congresswoman Luna’s effort signals a broader shift or more theatrics, remains to be seen.
More than twenty years from 9/11, Luna’s bill forces Republicans to pick a side – the illusion of safety under surveillance, or the erasure of civil liberties. Will it be the crusade against the Patriot Act’s authoritarian tendencies that unites the moderates on both sides of the aisle? Or will it deepen the perennial divide?