House committee advances bill to limit attorney general data secrecy, citing Supreme Court decision

The Minnesota House Judiciary Committee advanced House File 20, a bill that would amend section 13.65 of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act to clarify that “data on individuals” means data about natural persons rather than records about organizations or non‑individual policy matters.

Supporters told the committee the change corrects what they called an incorrect interpretation by the Minnesota Supreme Court in Energy Policy Advocates v. Ellison and would restore decades of practice that treated data on institutions and policy differently from data about people. Opponents, including the Office of the Attorney General, warned the change could expose complainants and small businesses to disclosure and urged a more nuanced fix.

Representative Niska, the bill’s author, told the committee the proposal is “a very, very small change” that “just adds 2 words to section 13.65,” and that the change would accomplish three goals: reverse the court’s interpretation, restore balance between transparency and individual privacy, and increase public visibility into who influences the attorney general’s office. He argued the Energy Policy Advocates decision “distorted the meaning of the Data Practices Act” and allowed non‑individual policy material to…