Senate committee advances bill to shield sensitive personal data, adds MVD enforcement authority

Senate Bill 36, which would create the "Non-Disclosure of Sensitive Personal Information Act," was amended and recommended for a due pass by the Senate Judiciary Committee after supporters described safety and privacy risks from selling or sharing MVD and other state-held personal data.

The bill as introduced creates a uniform policy for how state employees must handle designated categories of sensitive information, lists exceptions, establishes civil penalties and enforcement mechanisms, and, in the version the committee considered, adds language amending the motor vehicle code to protect MVD records. Sponsor Senator Duhigg moved an amendment that specifies which federal immigration statutes may be the basis for sharing MVD records and gives the Motor Vehicle Division director authority to revoke a nongovernmental entity’s access to MVD data if that entity uses records for enforcement of the Federal Immigration and Nationality Act (INS/INA), excluding felony criminal provisions.

Why it matters: supporters told the committee that a range of New Mexicans — survivors of domestic abuse, immigrants, LGBTQ people — rely on confidentiality for safety. Mary Ellen Garcia, CEO of the New Mexico Coalition Against Domestic Violence, said failing to protect survivor data “creates serious public safety risks by increasing opportunities for abusers … to locate, stalk and retaliate against their victims and survivors.” Other supporters, including immigration attorneys and civil-rights groups, argued the bill would help preserve trust in public systems that provide identification, benefits and services.

Supporters and amendment: Senator Duhigg explained the amendment replaces the phrase “federal immigration laws” with “the Federal Immigration and Nationality Act except felony criminal provisions of that act” and adds a revocation provision for MVD access by nongovernmental entities if they misuse MVD records for INA enforcement. She said the change responded to stakeholder concerns that the prior phrasing was too broad and that the intent was not to curtail law enforcement access for criminal investigations. ACLU of New Mexico staff attorney Denali Wilson said court precedent supports states setting policies for state-held personal data.

Opposition and questions: Committee members pressed on scope and on whether the revocation authority would be permanent. A senator expressed concern the language allowed perpetual revocation; the sponsor said the language is permissive ("may revoke") and that the director has discretion and reinstatement could occur if the violation is corrected. No registered opposition spoke before the committee voted.

Action: The committee adopted the sponsor’s amendment and recorded a due-pass recommendation on the amended bill.

What’s next: With the committee’s due-pass recommendation the bill moves to the Senate for further consideration. The amendment narrows which federal immigration provisions are implicated and adds an administrative enforcement mechanism for MVD access.