Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice Data Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Witnesses urge fast responses from social platforms in "Chris Steele's Law" hearing
Summary
Supporters, including survivors, prosecutors and law enforcement, told the House Judiciary Committee that HB 4,045 (dash-2) would speed communications-provider responses to search warrants in stalking and domestic-violence cases — 72 hours for social media platforms and five business days for other providers — and could prevent escalation and save lives.
The House Judiciary Committee heard testimony Monday in favor of House Bill 4,045, named "Chris Steele's Law," which would require defined social media platforms to respond to certain search-warrant requests within 72 hours and other communications providers within five business days under the dash‑2 amendment.
Representative Kevin Mannix, who opened the presentation, said the measure is intended to close a systems gap that has allowed dangerous delays in returning communications data to law enforcement. He said the bill’s narrow focus is to expedite responses in stalking and domestic-violence investigations so officers can identify or clear suspects quickly.
Rebecca Ivanoff, who identified herself as the cousin of Christelle Krug, testified that search warrants issued in November 2023 returned weeks or months later and that timely data obtained later on the day of Krug’s murder revealed the identity of the perpetrator. "The communications companies were the only entities who held the keys to the identity of Christelle's true stalker and killer," Ivanoff said, urging passage to prevent future tragedies.
Sarah Sabri, a senior assistant attorney general and statewide domestic-violence resource, described how digital evidence often holds the key to danger assessments but can take weeks or months to obtain. "Time is not neutral," Sabri said. "In domestic violence and stalking cases, time can mean the difference between intervention and tragedy."
Law-enforcement witnesses including Lane County Sheriff Carl Wilksen and other chiefs and detectives supported the measure, saying it does not expand police authority but would prioritize warrant returns that are already legally required. The Oregon Judicial Department identified itself as neutral but said the dash‑2 amendment reflected substantial technical work to make implementation practicable.
Committee members asked about processes for a communications provider to challenge a warrant or file a motion to quash and about the practical reasons for current delays. Aaron Knott of the Judicial Department said the amendment allows providers a window to respond (including filing a motion to quash) and noted that providers contend with volume and differing internal processes.
Proponents framed the bill as a compromise: requiring rapid responses for high‑risk investigations while preserving existing exigent‑circumstance processes that can secure immediate access in emergent situations.
The bill remained in public hearing at the committee’s close; no formal vote was recorded on Feb. 9.
