At a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing, senators questioned four administration nominees about the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency’s (CISA) role in elections and speech matters, the independence of the intelligence community’s inspector general, Department of Homeland Security science and technology priorities and staffing shortfalls on the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.

The exchanges focused on three near-term items: the pending reauthorization of the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015 (often called CISA 2015) and expiring state and local cybersecurity grants; concerns about the impartiality of an intelligence community inspector general nominee who has served in ODNI leadership; and the D.C. Superior Court’s caseload pressure, which senators said is worsened by vacancies.

Senators pressed Sean Planky, the nominee to lead CISA, about the agency’s past role in reviewing online content and its mission going forward. “If confirmed, as the leader of CISA, I'd seek to restore CISA to its congressional authorities and focus on the missions that … secure the federal civilian executive branch computer systems and protect the critical infrastructure of the United States,” Planky said during questioning. Planky told members he would not task CISA with policing political speech and said he would focus the agency on protecting federal systems and critical infrastructure. He voiced support for reauthorizing the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015 and for continued funding of the state and local cybersecurity grant program, both of which senators said are due for action before September deadlines.

Senator Richard Blumenthal pressed Planky on whether the 2020 election was “rigged and stolen.” Planky replied, “I have not reviewed any of the cybersecurity of the 2020 election,” and later told the committee that the Electoral College confirmed President Biden’s victory. Blumenthal told Planky that agency leadership must be “above politics” and urged clear, unequivocal statements that past elections were secure; Planky said CISA is a “consent-based cybersecurity agency” that supports states and would “do our due diligence to support those states.”

Christopher Fox, the nominee to be inspector general of the intelligence community, faced questions about impartiality after accepting a senior-advisor role in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). Senator Peters asked how employees could trust the inspector general’s independence given Fox’s recent ODNI role; Fox said independence and impartiality would be his top priorities and that he had been “properly insulated from any personnel decisions or any significant organizational decisions” while serving in the ODNI role. Fox also told senators that in practice he would “literally leave the room” if matters arose that presented conflicts and pledged that “nobody is above the law.”

Pedro Allende, the nominee for undersecretary for science and technology at DHS, described collaborations he oversaw in Florida between state government and laboratories and universities, including research agreements with the University of Florida, University of South Florida, Florida International University and Idaho National Laboratory. Allende said those partnerships were used to assess infrastructure and emerging technologies such as battery systems and inverters tied to solar equipment, and he emphasized he would rely on directorate experts if confirmed. “If confirmed, I will consult with the components in the law enforcement space … to understand their needs, gaps and wants,” Allende said when asked about counter‑drone tools and other operational needs.

Edward O’Connell, the nominee to be an associate judge on the D.C. Superior Court, told senators he would manage a heavy caseload “expeditiously without sacrificing thoroughness.” Committee members noted that the court has 15 vacancies out of 62 seats and that two additional judges are set to retire in September, a shortfall senators said delays cases and strains current judges.

Other topics raised during the hearing included reported secret communications found in certain foreign‑made power infrastructure and how DHS science and technology officials would prioritize AI risks after release of models that some developers flagged for potential biological-harm capabilities. Senators urged Allende to treat AI and bio-risk issues as urgent and to consult technical staff and laboratories as appropriate. Members also discussed the potential national-security implications of Chinese‑made energy equipment and described state responses such as Florida’s 2023 ban on some Chinese drones; Allende noted Florida’s actions and said he was not personally aware of test results in all cases.

No formal committee votes occurred during the hearing. Members repeatedly urged rapid action on reauthorizing CISA 2015 and on funding the state and local cybersecurity grant program before the fall deadlines. The nominees said, if confirmed, they would work with agency leadership and Congress to secure resources for critical cybersecurity, science and court needs.

The committee left the hearing record open to receive nominee questionnaires and some letters of support; the chair noted that financial disclosures are on file with the committee and that the record would remain open until noon the following day.