Trump Pulls Clayton's Confirmation Hearing Hours Before It Started, Ties FISA Revival to Voter ID Bill

Since Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act lapsed on Friday, June 13, the path to restoring the expired surveillance program has grown more tangled, not less.

On Wednesday morning, President Trump posted on Truth Social that he was cancelling Jay Clayton's Senate confirmation hearing, which had been scheduled for that same day and fast-tracked specifically because of the FISA lapse. Trump said he will keep Bill Pulte, a top housing official with no known intelligence background, as acting director of national intelligence. The announcement came from Évian-les-Bains, France, where Trump was attending the final day of the G7 summit, according to CBS News.

The Sequence That Got Here

The collapse is the result of compounding miscalculations on both sides. Bipartisan opposition to Pulte's original nomination forced Trump to turn to Clayton, the sitting U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, who was seen as broadly acceptable. Democrats, led by Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chairman Mark Warner, signaled openness to Clayton. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Tuesday he expected to process Clayton's nomination by week's end, calling him "eminently qualified," according to the Daily Signal.

But Trump's account of why the deal fell apart places the fault squarely on Senate Democrats. "The Republicans agreed with Dumocrats to remove very fair, and talented, William Pulte, from serving as Acting DNI in return for getting FISA approved by the Dumocrats," Trump wrote, as reported by the New York Post. His claim: Republicans moved so fast on the Clayton hearings that Pulte would be out the door before Democrats voted on FISA, and then Democrats said they'd vote against FISA anyway. "The Republicans wound up having fulfilled their commitment, but Dumocrats broke the Deal."

Minority Leader Chuck Schumer's public statements, as reported by the Daily Signal, did not confirm the deal Trump described. Whether a firm, enforceable agreement existed, or whether both sides were operating on assumptions, is not established by any source here.

Two New Conditions

Trump added conditions that were NOT part of the original FISA negotiation. First, he said he won't allow Clayton to leave the U.S. Attorney's office until James McDonald, Clayton's nominated successor as Manhattan U.S. Attorney, is confirmed by the Senate. "I may not be able to get the extraordinary Sullivan & Cromwell Partner, Jamie, approved, and I don't want to take Jay Clayton away from the great job he is doing until Jamie is in place," Trump wrote, per the New York Post.

Second, and more consequentially, Trump said he will not approve FISA without the SAVE America Act attached to it. That bill requires voters to show ID when casting ballots. According to CBS News, the SAVE America Act currently lacks sufficient support to pass in either chamber of the Republican-controlled Congress.

So the president is now conditioning the revival of a bipartisan national security tool on passage of a bill that his own party cannot currently pass.

What Section 702 Actually Does

Section 702 allows U.S. spy agencies to collect, without a warrant, the communications of targeted foreign nationals located outside the United States. According to ClickOnDetroit's reporting on the AP wire, national security officials across both parties have described it as critical for disrupting terrorist attacks and espionage operations. Civil liberties advocates have raised legitimate concerns about the incidental collection of Americans' communications, and that tension predates the current fight by years.

The program has been operating on the authority of a prior reauthorization. The new lapse means Congress has not given fresh authorization. The intelligence community does not immediately go dark, but legal authority for new collection targeting under 702 is in dispute territory.

The Strongest Case for Trump's Position

The argument for Trump's approach is straightforward. The SAVE America Act mandates voter ID, a policy that enjoys majority support in most public polling and that parallels requirements for activities like opening a bank account or boarding a plane. If Democrats refuse to confirm a widely acceptable DNI nominee and also refuse to act on voter ID, tying the two together is a negotiating tactic. Trump's position is that Democrats broke a deal first, and that he's responding with leverage he has available.

The problem with that logic, as CBS News notes, is that the SAVE America Act doesn't have Republican votes either. You cannot use a bill as leverage when your own caucus won't pass it. The FISA lapse is real, and the leverage tool is theoretical.

Jay Clayton

Clayton, 59, previously chaired the Securities and Exchange Commission during Trump's first term. His current role as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District involves prosecuting white-collar crime and financial fraud. Senator James Lankford said in a Tuesday social media post, cited by the Daily Signal, that Clayton had prosecuted "terrorists and international cartels" in that role. Clayton has no career background in signals intelligence, human intelligence, or the IC's management structure. Thune acknowledged this fact while arguing it doesn't disqualify him.

Schumer's public response stopped short of endorsing Clayton, according to the Daily Signal, but several Democrats had not ruled him out. That window appears closed for now.

What Happens Next

Pulte remains as acting DNI with bipartisan opposition still on record against him. The Intelligence Committee had been expected to vote on Clayton's nomination as soon as Thursday, per CBS News. That vote is now off the table. No new hearing date has been announced. Until McDonald is confirmed as Manhattan U.S. Attorney and the SAVE America Act either passes or is decoupled from FISA, Trump's post suggests he will not resubmit Clayton's nomination for action. Whether Senate Republicans attempt to separate the FISA vote from both conditions, or whether leadership has the votes to do so without Trump's support, is the question that will determine how long Section 702 stays lapsed.