On June 2 as President Barack Obama signed the USA Freedom Act into law, curtailing domestic surveillance, The Associated Press reported that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has been using a fleet of low-flying aircraft over U.S. cities for video and cellphone surveillance. And on June 4 The New York Times reported that the Obama administration secretly expanded the National Security Agency’s role in warrantless domestic cybersurveillance in 2012.

While the new law imposes welcome restraints on warrantless intrusions into privacy, the battle to curb unchecked governmental power is far from over. The law contains its share of loopholes and reinforces much of the post-9/11 security state. And the challenges of engaging in robust public debate surrounding privacy and security are compounded by the administration’s unprecedented secrecy.

The sweeping surveillance authority granted by the Patriot Act, passed in the aftermath of 9/11, included provisions that expired May 31. The vigorous fight over the continuation of mass data collection was propelled by the explosive revelations of whistleblower Edward Snowden two years ago, who disclosed the vast capabilities of NSA programs. Last month the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals found that the Patriot Act did not authorize bulk surveillance.

The Freedom Act, which passed after a lengthy showdown between Senate security hawks and privacy advocates, was hailed as a significant step forward in reining in the NSA’s authority to engage in warrantless data gathering. Among other reforms, the law ends the NSA’s 14-year program of bulk collection of telephone data — instead requiring the agency to seek individual records from telephone companies — and makes the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, or FISA court, more transparent.

Still, many view the reform and court decision as a vindication for Snowden. The New York Times characterized the Freedom Act as “a cultural turning point for the nation.” But that pivot will require an ongoing, informed national conversation and vigilance to ensure the nation does not slip back into unfettered government power to encroach on the privacy of its citizens. Despite his role in prompting the debate about the NSA’s massive intrusions into privacy, Snowden is still in exile and widely vilified.

The FBI previously admitted it has used aircraft for surveillance, saying they are utilized only in select cases. At a hearing in 2013, FBI Director Robert Mueller said the agency employed the aircraft in a “very, very minimal way, very seldom.” Yet the AP report contradicted the image of a rarely used resource. In fact, the FBI operates 50 aircraft and conducted 100 flights last month alone, covering 11 states and Washington, D.C. The FBI claims that the aircraft are utilized only for specific investigations, not the type of bulk data collection or mass surveillance for which the NSA has come under fire. But the AP’s investigation revealed that the program is far more expansive than previously known, and its use of fictitious companies to cover its tracks raises alarms about the program’s transparency.

The FBI planes generally conduct video surveillance at the request of its employees or state authorities, without the authorization of a judge. But some of its planes are equipped with advanced surveillance capabilities, including cell site simulator technology, which can identify individuals’ phones, even when they are not in use. Because some aircraft were targeting for long periods buildings that were not suitable for video surveillance, gathering of cellphone data is likely far broader than the bureau suggests.