Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Online Privacy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee carries over doxing bill after concerns about intent and scope

Alabama Senate Judiciary Committee · March 18, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Lawmakers debated HB106, a proposed doxing law, with senators raising questions about how to prove intent, the breadth of covered material, and the risk of capturing innocuous social posts; the committee carried the bill over for further drafting.

Representative Given presented HB106, described as a companion to SB203, to criminalize doxing by making it a crime to intentionally publish another person’s or their family's identifying information online when it can cause harm. "A person commits a crime of doxing if she intentionally shares someone's ... information, address, anything online that can cause harm to this individual," Given told the committee.

Several senators pressed practical and constitutional concerns. Senator Smith asked how prosecutors would prove intent in online postings: "How are we going to determine intentionally?" he asked, noting that people frequently post without malicious intent and questioning how law enforcement would distinguish harmful conduct. Other members raised examples of innocuous social media posts — photos of children at school or parents posting their own family photos — and warned a broadly worded statute could ensnare well‑meaning conduct.

Senator Gavan, who participates on a Uniform Law Commission study committee, described the balance between First Amendment rights and criminal liability for harmful online acts and said the issue has been challenging for lawmakers nationwide. Multiple senators recommended tightening statutory elements and clearer lists of covered information to avoid overbreadth.

Given the number of unresolved drafting questions, the committee carried HB106 over to a subsequent meeting to allow sponsors and analysts to refine definitions, intent elements and statutory lists of covered personal identifying information.

What happens next: sponsors and analysts will work to clarify intent standards and the list of covered personal data, with the bill set for reconsideration at a later committee meeting.