Judge Colleen Kollar Kotelly

Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly has spent decades at the intersection of technology, national security, and government power — including a stint as presiding judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Appointed to the D.D.C. by President Clinton in 1997, she served on the FISA Court from 2002 to 2013 and oversaw some of the most sensitive surveillance authorizations in American history. In 2025, she issued a ruling limiting DOGE's access to Treasury Department payment systems.

For practitioners: Judge Kollar-Kotelly's combination of national security expertise, technology law experience, and government accountability rulings makes her one of the most significant judges for AI-related cases that touch government surveillance, data privacy, or federal agency operations. The D.D.C. is still building its formal AI framework, but this judge understands the technology policy implications better than most.

FISA Court Experience and AI Surveillance Implications

Kollar-Kotelly served as presiding judge of the FISA Court from 2002 to 2006 and as a regular member through 2013. In an August 2004 order, she authorized the NSA's bulk acquisition of internet metadata — including routing information and IP addresses — under FISA's pen register and trap-and-trace provisions. This experience is directly relevant to emerging AI surveillance questions: how AI tools can be used in intelligence collection, whether AI-processed surveillance data satisfies FISA's requirements, and what privacy protections apply to AI-enhanced government monitoring. Practitioners bringing cases involving government AI surveillance before Kollar-Kotelly should understand she's engaged with these questions at the highest classification level.

The DOGE-Treasury Ruling: Government Data and AI Risks

In February 2025, Kollar-Kotelly issued a temporary ruling limiting the Department of Government Efficiency's access to the Treasury Department's payment system. The plaintiffs alleged that DOGE's access would allow the department to access personal information of millions of Americans. This ruling is significant for AI practitioners because it addresses the intersection of government data access, privacy, and new technology-driven initiatives. As government agencies increasingly use AI to process citizen data, questions about authorization, privacy, and oversight will land in the D.D.C. — and Kollar-Kotelly's ruling signals close scrutiny of government technology initiatives.

The D.D.C.'s Evolving AI Framework

The D.D.C. established an AI Taskforce in March 2024, published an AI Roadmap in June 2025, and issued an Internal AI Use Policy for court staff in July 2025. Formal attorney-facing AI disclosure requirements haven't been finalized. The D.C. Circuit's unanimous affirmance of Judge Howell's *Thaler v. Perlmutter* copyright ruling — and the Supreme Court's denial of certiorari in March 2026 — shows this circuit is already producing binding AI precedent. For practitioners before Kollar-Kotelly, the combination of institutional AI planning and active AI caselaw means formal requirements are approaching. The D.D.C. is building infrastructure, not ignoring the issue.

Practical Compliance Steps for Filing Before Judge Kollar-Kotelly

Step 1: Check the D.D.C. website and Judge Kollar-Kotelly's individual practices for the most current AI guidance. Step 2: Never input classified, FISA-related, or national security material into public AI tools. This judge has spent a career handling the most sensitive government information — she takes information security deadly seriously. Step 3: For cases involving government data access or surveillance, prepare for sophisticated engagement with technology policy. Kollar-Kotelly understands these issues at a level most judges don't. Step 4: Verify all citations independently. The D.D.C. handles statutory interpretation at scale — AI hallucination risks are highest with statutory and regulatory citations. Step 5: Monitor the D.D.C.'s AI Taskforce developments. Formal requirements may be announced with minimal lead time.

National Security, AI, and the Future of Government Technology Cases

Judge Kollar-Kotelly sits at the nexus of the most important AI governance questions: How will the government use AI for surveillance? What privacy protections apply? Who authorizes AI-driven government data access? Her FISA Court experience, her DOGE-Treasury ruling, and her three decades in the D.D.C. position her to address these questions with rare depth. As executive orders shape federal AI policy and agencies deploy AI systems at scale, the litigation challenging these programs will concentrate in the D.D.C. Practitioners should expect Kollar-Kotelly to engage with both the legal framework and the technical substance of government AI cases.

The Bottom Line: Judge Kollar-Kotelly brings FISA Court experience and national security expertise to AI-related cases. Before filing in her courtroom, never input sensitive material into public AI tools, verify all citations, and prepare for sophisticated engagement with technology policy. The D.D.C.'s formal AI requirements are coming — her courtroom will be among the first to apply them.