Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Data Protection Law Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee refers privacy bill for peace and correctional officers to Public Safety after amendment
Summary
Representative Duran’s House File 1567, which would extend data‑privacy protections similar to those granted to judges to peace officers and correctional officers, was amended (A2) and re‑referred to Public Safety Policy and Finance; the bill excludes real property records and drew discussion about scope and implementation.
The Judiciary Committee on March 27 adopted an A2 amendment and recommended House File 1567, sponsored by Representative Duran, to be re‑referred to the Committee on Public Safety Policy and Finance. The bill would extend certain personal‑data protections now provided to judicial officials to peace officers and correctional officers.
Representative Duran told the committee the change aims to protect officers and their families from doxing and related harassment. “The safety and security of peace officers and correction officers are paramount,” he said, describing personal experience with online exposure of family data.
Jeff Potts, executive director of the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association, testified in support on behalf of chiefs and sheriffs associations, describing incidents in which personal information obtained from public records and posted online led to death threats, fraudulent liens and other harassment against officers. Potts said those threats continued to affect the officers’ finances and personal safety.
House Research staff and Representative Curran clarified that both the existing judicial‑official protections and the bill’s protections would not apply to personal information that remains in county real property records; counties raised concerns about the operational complexity of making property records inaccessible. Committee members discussed where the legislative line should be drawn and who else might qualify for similar protections. Representative Duran and others said this bill is intended as a first step for a high‑risk group and further work will follow in Public Safety.
The committee adopted the amendment and re‑referred the bill to Public Safety Policy and Finance; the transcript records a voice vote and no roll‑call tally.
