Committee adopts substitute to clarify when law enforcement can get third‑party electronic data
Loading...
Summary
The committee adopted a second substitute to HB 261 after sponsors said the bill follows guidance from Utah v. Andress to clarify statutory steps law enforcement must take to obtain third‑party electronic information while preserving legitimate interagency cooperation.
Representative Jason B. Kyle presented a second substitute to HB 261, saying the changes respond to the Utah Supreme Court’s decision in Utah v. Andress and are intended to make the Electronic Information Privacy Act clearer for courts and law enforcement.
Sponsor said the substitute aims to protect Fourth Amendment rights while keeping needed investigative cooperation intact. "This bill makes it workable for law enforcement to do their job as well," Kyle said.
Jason Chipman, policy director at the Libertas Institute, testified in support and described the sub as closing a loophole that had allowed circumvention of statutory process; he said the sub also preserves lawful interagency sharing when other jurisdictions follow the legal steps required by Utah law.
The committee adopted the second substitute by voice vote and then voted unanimously to favorably recommend HB 261 to the House floor.
Next steps: The bill advances to the House calendar for floor consideration.
