US bill proposes 21st-century privateers to take on cybercrime

A new House proposal would revive a centuries-old practice by empowering private contractors to hunt ransomware gangs and crypto thieves under government-issued letters of marque.

A neo-privateering push against cybercrime

Arizona Congressman David Schweikert has introduced “The Scam Farms Marque and Reprisal Authorization Act of 2025,” a bill that would let the U.S. president issue letters of marque to “privately armed and equipped persons” to take action against cybercriminals deemed a threat to the United States. In essence, it’s a modern spin on an 18th-century tool—state-sanctioned privateers—recast for today’s digital battleground.

Under the proposal, government-contracted operators could “employ all means reasonably necessary” to seize property and detain or “punish” designated cyber adversaries. The legislation frames these activities as a response to escalating digital threats that cross borders and exploit gaps in traditional law enforcement and diplomatic reach.

The bill identifies a slate of targetable offenses tied to cyber-enabled financial crime and information theft, including:

• Theft of cryptocurrencies
• Ransomware attacks
• “Pig butchering” investment scams
• Identity theft
• Unauthorized computer access to obtain sensitive personal or classified information
• Online password trafficking
• Compromising computers with malicious code

“Criminal enterprises that employ cybercrimes and coerced labor present an unusual and extraordinary threat to the economic and national security of the United States,” the bill states. It also characterizes these scams as “acts of war” carried out by individuals, organized criminal groups, and foreign governments.

Back to the future: letters of marque in the digital era

Letters of marque and reprisal date back to the early American republic, authorizing private parties to act on behalf of the government against foreign adversaries. Reviving the concept for cyberspace would mark a significant shift in how the U.S. contemplates offensive and defensive measures against online crime—potentially expanding the toolkit beyond traditional indictments, sanctions, and law enforcement takedowns.

If enacted, the model could test new boundaries in public–private cyber operations, asset seizure, and cross-border enforcement. The approach also raises key questions around oversight, attribution, and the rules of engagement when private actors are empowered to disrupt criminal infrastructure and confiscate digital assets under federal authority.

Crypto crime is surging—so are U.S. seizures

The legislative push lands amid a costly year for crypto users and platforms. More than $142 million in digital assets was stolen by hackers in July alone, and cumulative losses in 2025 have already exceeded $3 billion. As law enforcement ramps up investigations, seized crypto has increasingly become part of federal asset forfeiture efforts.

In January, President Donald Trump signed an executive order establishing a U.S. Bitcoin and crypto reserve, directing that the reserve may only grow through budget-neutral means or asset forfeitures. That framework dovetails with a series of high-profile seizures tied to ransomware cases:

• In July, the federal government filed a civil complaint to claim more than 20 Bitcoin (valued at over $2.3 million) seized by the FBI’s Dallas division during an operation targeting the Chaos ransomware group.
• Also in July, the Department of Justice announced the seizure of $1 million in crypto from the BlackSuit ransomware group.
• In August, the DOJ authorized the seizure of $2.8 million in crypto from a wallet controlled by Ianis Aleksandrovich Antropenko, who has been charged with orchestrating ransomware attacks against individuals and businesses.

Related: Crypto crime unit with $250M in seizures expands with Binance

What’s at stake

Supporters see the bill as a way to outmaneuver sophisticated cybercrime syndicates, particularly those operating from jurisdictions that are unwilling or unable to cooperate with U.S. law enforcement. By contracting vetted private actors under presidential authority, the government could move faster to disrupt operations, seize illicit funds, and deter future attacks.

Critically, the proposal would hinge on strong oversight and clear legal contours, given the risks of misattribution, collateral damage, and international friction in cyber operations. Defining “all means reasonably necessary,” specifying command-and-control, and establishing transparent reporting would be central to how the model functions in practice.

The road ahead

As Congress weighs the measure, the debate will likely focus on whether 18th-century authorities can be responsibly adapted to 21st-century threats. If passed, the president could begin issuing letters of marque to authorized private operators—potentially reshaping the U.S. response to ransomware, crypto theft, and fraud at a moment when digital losses keep climbing and traditional deterrence struggles to keep pace.