Skip to content

Bills · 2023-2024 Regular Session

SB 927

Died at session end Official bill text Atom feed

Relating to: privacy protections for judicial officers, granting rule-making authority, and providing a penalty. (FE)

Court — Commissioner Data processing — Privacy issues Elections commission Judge Legislature — Criminal penalties joint review committee on Privacy Supreme court Tanf _temporary assistance for needy families_

  1. Introduced, stopped here
  2. Passes Senate, not reached
  3. Passes Assembly, not reached
  4. Governor signs, not reached
  5. Law, not reached

Unfamiliar terms? Glossary

What this bill does

Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau

This bill establishes privacy protections for judicial officers and a procedure for

a judicial officer to complete a written request for protection of the personal

information of the judicial officer and the judicial officer's immediate family.

Under the bill, a government agency may not publicly post or display publicly

available content that includes a judicial officer's personal information, provided

that the government agency has received a written request from the officer that the

agency refrain from disclosing the personal information. Upon receipt of the written

request, the agency must remove the personal information within five business days

and may not publicly post or display the information. The personal information is

also exempt from public records requests unless the agency has received consent to

make the information available to the public.

The bill also provides that, upon receipt of a written request for privacy

protections from a judicial officer, all persons, businesses, and associations must

refrain from publicly posting or displaying on the Internet publicly available content

that includes the personal information of the judicial officer or the judicial officer's

immediate family. The prohibition does not apply to personal information that the

judicial officer or an immediate family member of the judicial officer voluntarily

publishes on the Internet after the bill goes into effect or personal information

lawfully received from a state or federal government source, including from an

employee or agent of the state or federal government.

After a person, business, or association has received a written request from a

judicial officer, the person, business, or association must, within 72 hours of the

request, remove the personal information from the Internet; ensure that the judicial

officer's personal information is not made available on any website or subsidiary

website controlled by that person, business, or association; and identify any other

instances of the identified information that should also be removed. Under the bill,

once a written request is received, no person, business, or association may transfer

the judicial officer's personal information to any other person, business, or

association through any medium, except for personal information that the judicial

officer or an immediate family member of the judicial officer voluntarily publishes

on the Internet after the bill goes into effect, or if a transfer is made at the request

of the judicial officer or is necessary to effectuate a request to the person, business,

or association from the judicial officer. The bill also expressly prohibits a data broker,

as defined in the bill, from knowingly selling, licensing, trading, purchasing, or

otherwise making available for consideration the personal information of a judicial

officer or a judicial officer's immediate family.

Under the bill, a candidate for a judicial office may, instead of having his or her

name and residential address listed on nomination papers, file a certification of

residence with the Elections Commission before circulating nomination papers. A

judicial officer circulating nomination papers on behalf of a candidate for a

What it would cost

Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs

Sponsors

Introduced by: Taylor (D) , Wanggaard (R)

5 cosponsors

Hurd (R) , O'Connor (R) , Ortiz-Velez (D) , Subeck (D) , Tusler (R)

Votes

Senate: Report adoption of Senate Substitute Amendment 2 recommended by Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety, Ayes 7, Noes 0

Passed 7–0 Feb 27, 2024 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Senate: Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety, Ayes 7, Noes 0

Passed 7–0 Feb 27, 2024 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Full history

  1. Jan 19, 2024 · Senate

    Introduced by Senators Wanggaard and Taylor; cosponsored by Representatives Tusler and Ortiz-Velez

  2. Jan 19, 2024 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety

  3. Jan 24, 2024 · Senate

    Representative Hurd added as a cosponsor

  4. Jan 29, 2024 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Feb 2, 2024 · Senate

    Senate Substitute Amendment 1 offered by Senator Wanggaard

  6. Feb 6, 2024 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  7. Feb 7, 2024 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  8. Feb 14, 2024 · Senate

    Representative O'Connor added as a cosponsor

  9. Feb 15, 2024 · Senate

    Representative Subeck added as a cosponsor

  10. Feb 23, 2024 · Senate

    Senate Substitute Amendment 2 offered by Senator Wanggaard

  11. Feb 27, 2024 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  12. Feb 27, 2024 · Senate

    Report adoption of Senate Substitute Amendment 2 recommended by Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety, Ayes 7, Noes 0

  13. Feb 27, 2024 · Senate

    Report passage as amended recommended by Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety, Ayes 7, Noes 0

  14. Feb 27, 2024 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  15. Apr 15, 2024 · Senate

    Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1