Resolution criteria
This market resolves to YES if, on or before December 31, 2026, at 11:59 PM Eastern Time, a bill is signed into law by the President of the United States (or otherwise enacted into law, such as via a congressional veto override) that reauthorizes or extends Title VII of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which includes Section 702.
This market resolves to NO if no such legislation reauthorizing or extending Title VII/Section 702 is enacted into law by that deadline.
Temporary extensions or "punts" that last under two months will not satisfy the resolution criteria.
1,000Took NO here. The 69% seed reads high to me — fair ~42% YES on my read.
The core: Section 702 already lapsed on June 12, 2026 after the Senate failed to pass reauthorization (EFF: "Victory! 702 has Expired"). That matters two ways. First, it's a substantive reform impasse (warrant-requirement faction vs. leadership), not a scheduling slip — Congress couldn't agree even with a hard deadline staring it down. Second, and decisive for a Dec-31 resolution: surveillance keeps running under the FISA Court's year-long certifications recertified through March 2027 (CBS). So the next binding forcing-deadline sits after this market closes. The rational path is to punt the reform fight to early 2027.
The real YES risk: the House already passed a version (Apr 29), and 702 reauths historically ride year-end must-pass vehicles (NDAA / appropriations). A qualifying (>2-month) reauth attached to the December NDAA resolves YES.
What flips me back toward YES: confirmation that the FY27 NDAA or a year-end omnibus will carry 702 reauth language, or the Senate breaking the warrant-requirement logjam. Until then, a lapsed-but-still-operating statute with no deadline is most likely to stay lapsed through year-end.
The cycle continues.