Special Counsel John Durham’s report about FBI bias and “deficiencies” in its Trump-Russia investigation has sparked a round of criticism from conservatives and supporters of Mr. Trump who claim the FBI has become a rogue agency in need of serious reforms. It’s far from clear, though, if the FBI’s critics, now that they control the U.S. House, will have their way.

Mr. Durham’s report, released on Monday, finds that the FBI did not have concrete evidence of collusion between Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russian intelligence services before launching an investigation into the matter, dubbed “Crossfire Hurricane.”

“At the time of the opening of Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI had no information in its holdings indicating that at any time during the campaign anyone in the Trump campaign had been in contact with any Russian intelligence officials,” the report reads. The investigation potentially violated multiple guidelines at the FBI meant to protect Americans against abuse of power from within the intelligence community, the report finds.

In a statement responding to the filing, the FBI said that it was aware of some of the issues with the investigations and has already implemented changes to remedy the problems since.

“Had those reforms been in place in 2016, the missteps identified in the report could have been prevented,” the FBI statement said. “This report reinforces the importance of ensuring the FBI continues to do its work with the rigor, objectivity, and professionalism the American people deserve and rightly expect.”

Some elected Republicans are not satisfied and are once again demanding defunding of the FBI. Representative Matt Gaetz, a fervent Trump supporter, tweeted that “this should be a clarion call for legislative reform. We need to defund and deauthorize government entities that are converted from the just cause of defending our nation into enforcement wings of political parties.”

A senior fellow at the Cato Institute focusing on homeland security and civil liberties, Patrick Eddington, tells the Sun that he hopes the report will lead to reform at the FBI. “If you’re going to have a process of evaluation here you’re going to need to look at what is in place to keep the FBI from going off the rails,” Mr. Eddington says.

Mr. Eddington said that provisions aimed at keeping FBI investigations from overstepping their boundaries have been chipped away at over the years and that Congressional committees charged with holding the intelligence community to account have become “cheerleaders” for them.

The change Mr. Eddington says he’d like to see is a new charter for the FBI, as well as explicit protections, restricting the agency’s investigative power into activities protected by the First Amendment.

“They need to be expressly prohibited from investigating civil society groups participating in First Amendment protected activities unless they have probable cause to suspect there is something going on,” Mr. Eddington tells the Sun.

Some in the legal community, however, don’t see the Durham report as the bombshell that it’s been made out to be by the ilk of Mr. Gaetz. The vice president of the New York County Lawyers Association, Richard Swanson, says that it’s unlikely to result in legislation.

His first issue is with the fact that conservatives critical of “Crossfire Hurricane” have seized on the beginning of the investigation: specifically, the fact that the FBI had no concrete information suggesting a connection between Mr. Trump’s campaign and Russia when it began the investigation.

“I find the criticisms of the start of this investigation ludicrous,” Mr. Swanson tells the Sun. “Many investigations start with tips and you have to evaluate the quality of the tip and where the tip leads.”

Mr. Swanson does say that the FBI probably treated the investigation too credulously for too long after their initial probes, but concluded that the investigation simply isn’t the scandal it’s been made out to be.

Cato’s Mr. Eddington, however, tells the Sun that meaningful FBI reform, such as a new charter, won’t happen absent bipartisan support. In earlier years, it was Republicans defending the FBI in the face of allegations, by Democrats, of overreach. Since the FBI’s pursuit of President Trump, the GOP is now the aggrieved party.

The problem with passing something like a new charter for the FBI, Mr. Eddington explains, is getting past years of support from Congressional leaders from both parties for a powerful FBI as the enforcer of the “national security state.”

All the recent talk about FBI overreach is an aberration from the deferential way in which Congressional leaders from both parties have tended to treat federal law enforcement over the years, he says.

The current Speaker of the House, Kevin McCarthy, only agreed to help create the Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government as a concession to Freedom Caucus Republicans who refused to support his bid for speaker.

Mr. Eddington says that year after year, Congress has pushed through federal judges who are advocates for a strong FBI, and that Congressional leaders from both parties have also historically axed legislation that would put restrictions on executive agencies like the FBI, DEA, and CIA.