Detailed Instructions: In this task, you are given text for US Congressional and California state bills, your task is to generate a summary for this bill.
Problem:SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ''Law Enforcement Access to Data
Stored Abroad Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:
(1) The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986
(Public Law 99-508; 100 Stat. 1848) (referred to in this
section as ''ECPA'') was intended to protect the privacy of
electronic communications stored with providers of electronic
communications services and remote computing services, while
balancing the legitimate needs of law enforcement to access
records stored by such providers.
(2) To strike this balance, ECPA authorized governmental
entities to obtain certain categories of communications data
from providers using established, pre-existing forms of
process--warrants and subpoenas. It also created a new form of
court order, in section 2703(d) of title 18, United States
Code, that governmental entities could use to obtain additional
types of communications data.
(3) It has been well established that courts in the United
States lack the power to issue warrants authorizing
extraterritorial searches and seizures, and neither ECPA nor
subsequent amendments extended the warrant power of courts in
the United States beyond the territorial reach of the United
States.
(4) Nevertheless, Congress also recognizes the legitimate
needs of law enforcement agencies in the United States to
obtain, through lawful process, electronic communications
relevant to criminal investigations related to United States
persons wherever that content may be stored. Therefore, this
Act authorizes the use of search warrants extraterritorially
only where the Government seeks to obtain the contents of
electronic communications belonging to a United States person.

SEC. 3. SCOPE AND CLARIFICATION OF WARRANT REQUIREMENT.

(a) In General.--Chapter 121 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in section 2702(a), by amending paragraph (3) to read
as follows:
''(3) a provider of remote computing service or electronic
communication service to the public shall not knowingly divulge
to any governmental entity the contents of any communication
described in section 2703(a), or any record or other
information pertaining to a subscriber or customer of such
service.'';
(2) in section 2703--
(A) by striking subsections (a) and (b) and
inserting the following:
''(a) Contents of Wire or Electronic Communication in Electronic
Storage.--A governmental entity may require the disclosure by a
provider of electronic communication service or remote computing
service of the contents of a wire or electronic communication that is
in electronic storage with or otherwise stored, held, or maintained by
the provider only pursuant to a warrant issued using the procedures
described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (or, in the case
of a State court, issued using State warrant procedures) by a court of
competent jurisdiction. Subject to subsection (b), a warrant issued
pursuant to this subsection may be used to require the disclosure of
contents of a wire or electronic communication that are in the
provider's electronic storage within the United States or otherwise
stored, held, or maintained within the United States by the provider.
''(b) Warrant Requirements.--A warrant issued under subsection (a)
may require the disclosure of the contents of a wire or electronic
communication, regardless of where such contents may be in electronic
storage or otherwise stored, held, or maintained by the provider, if
the account-holder whose contents are sought by the warrant is a United
States person. A court issuing a warrant pursuant to this subsection,
on a motion made promptly by the service provider, shall modify or
vacate such warrant if the court finds that the warrant would require
the provider of an electronic communications or remote computing
service to violate the laws of a foreign country.'';
(B) in subsection (d), in the first sentence--
(i) by striking ''(b) or'';
(ii) by striking ''the contents of a wire
or electronic communication, or''; and
(iii) by striking ''sought, are'' and
inserting ''sought are''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
''(h) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section or in section
2702 shall be construed to limit the authority of a governmental entity
to use an administrative subpoena authorized under a Federal or State
statute or to use a Federal or State grand jury, trial, or civil
discovery subpoena to--
''(1) require an originator, addressee, or intended
recipient of an electronic communication to disclose the
contents of the electronic communication to the governmental
entity; or
''(2) require an entity that provides electronic
communication services to the officers, directors, employees,
or agents of the entity (for the purpose of carrying out their
duties) to disclose the contents of an electronic communication
to or from an officer, director, employee, or agent of the
entity to a governmental entity, if the electronic
communication is held, stored, or maintained on an electronic
communications system owned or operated by the entity.
''(i) Notice.--Except as provided in section 2705, not later than
10 business days after a governmental entity receives the contents of a
wire or electronic communication of a subscriber or customer from a
provider of electronic communication service or remote computing
service under subsection (a), the governmental entity shall serve upon,
or deliver to by registered or first-class mail, electronic mail, or
other means reasonably calculated to be effective, as specified by the
court issuing the warrant, the subscriber or customer--
''(1) a copy of the warrant; and
''(2) notice that informs the customer or subscriber--
''(A) of the nature of the law enforcement inquiry
with reasonable specificity; and
''(B) that information maintained for the customer
or subscriber by the provider of electronic
communication service or remote computing service named
in the process or request was supplied to, or requested
by, the governmental entity.'';
(3) in section 2704(a)(1), by striking ''section
2703(b)(2)'' and inserting ''section 2703'';
(4) in section 2705--
(A) in subsection (a), by striking paragraph (1)
and inserting the following:
''(1) A governmental entity that is seeking a warrant under
section 2703 may include in the application for the warrant a
request, which the court shall grant, for an order delaying the
notification required under section 2703(i) for a period of not
more than 90 days, if the court determines that there is reason
to believe that notification of the existence of the warrant
may have an adverse result described in paragraph (2) of this
subsection.''; and
(B) in subsection (b), in the matter preceding
paragraph (1), by striking ''under section
2703(b)(1)''; and
(5) in section 2711--
(A) in paragraph (3)(B) by striking ''warrants;
and'' and inserting ''warrants;'';
(B) in paragraph (4) by striking ''thereof.'' and
inserting ''thereof; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
''(5) the term 'United States person' means a citizen or
permanent resident alien of the United States, or an entity or
organization organized under the laws of the United States or a
State or political subdivision thereof.''.

SEC. 4. MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE TREATY REFORMS.

(a) Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty Transparency and Efficiency.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall establish--
(A) a form for use by a foreign government filing a
mutual legal assistance treaty request (referred to in
this section as an ''MLAT request''), which shall--
(i) be made available on the website of the
Department of Justice; and
(ii) require sufficient information and be
susceptible for use by a foreign government to
provide all the information necessary for the
MLAT request; and
(B) an online docketing system for all MLAT
requests, which shall allow a foreign government to
track the status of an MLAT request filed by the
foreign government.
(2) Annual publication.--Beginning not later than 1 year
after the date of enactment of this Act, and each year
thereafter, the Attorney General shall publish on the website
of the Department of Justice statistics on--
(A)(i) the number of MLAT requests made by the
Department of Justice to foreign governments for the
purpose of obtaining the contents of an electronic
communication or other information or records from a
provider of electronic communications or remote
computing services; and
(ii) the average length of time taken by foreign
governments to process the MLAT requests described in
clause (i); and
(B)(i) the number of MLAT requests made to the
Department of Justice by foreign governments for the
purpose of obtaining the contents of an electronic
communication or other information or records from a
provider of electronic communications or remote
computing services; and
(ii) the average length of time taken by the
Department of Justice to process the MLAT requests
described in clause (i).
(3) Notice to department of state.--The Attorney General
shall notify the Secretary of State not later than 7 days after
the date on which disclosure of electronic communications
content to a foreign government is made pursuant to an MLAT
request.
(b) Preservation of Records.--The Attorney General may issue a
request pursuant to section 2703(f) of title 18, United States Code,
upon receipt of an MLAT request that appears to be facially valid.
(c) Notification to Provider of MLAT Request.--When the Attorney
General makes use of the process provided in section 2703 of title 18,
United States Code, to obtain information from an electronic
communications provider or a remote computing provider based on an MLAT
request, the Attorney General shall notify that provider in writing
that the request has been made pursuant to a mutual legal assistance
treaty.

SEC. 5. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) data localization requirements imposed by foreign
governments on data providers are--
(A) incompatible with the borderless nature of the
Internet;
(B) an impediment to online innovation; and
(C) unnecessary to meet the needs of law
enforcement; and
(2) the Department of Justice, the Department of State, and
the United States Trade Representatives should pursue open data
flow policies with foreign nations.
Solution:
Law Enforcement Access to Data Stored Abroad Act Amends the federal criminal code to authorize a governmental entity to require the disclosure by a provider of electronic communication service or remote computing service of the contents of a wire or electronic communication that is in electronic storage with or otherwise stored, held, or maintained by the provider only pursuant to a warrant issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. Authorizes such a warrant to require such disclosure regardless of where such contents may be in electronic storage or otherwise stored, held, or maintained by the provider if the holder of the account the contents of which are sought by the warrant is a U.S. person. Requires a court, on a service provider's motion, to modify or vacate such a warrant upon finding that it would require the provider to violate the laws of a foreign country. Sets forth requirements for government notification of provider customers or subscribers regarding the receipt of communication contents pursuant to such a warrant. Directs the Attorney General to: (1) establish a form for use by a foreign government filing a mutual legal assistance treaty (MLAT) request; (2) establish an online docketing system for all MLAT requests; and (3) publish statistics annually on MLAT requests made by the Department of Justice (DOJ) to foreign governments, and by foreign governments to DOJ, to obtain the contents of communications or other information or records from a provider of electronic communications or remote computing services. Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) data localization requirements imposed by foreign governments on data providers are incompatible with the borderless nature of the Internet, an impediment to online innovation, and unnecessary to meet the needs of law enforcement; and (2) DOJ, the Department of State, and the U.S. Trade Representative should pursue open data flow policies with foreign nations.