Eavesdropping; limitations regarding the use of electronic monitoring devices; provide
Summary
SB 97 amends Georgia’s eavesdropping and privacy statute to add explicit limits on the use of electronic monitoring devices. The bill makes it unlawful to clandestinely place or direct another person to place a GPS device or other electronic monitoring device on a motor vehicle owned or leased by another person without consent when a protective order is in place against the person doing the monitoring. It also creates a broader prohibition on secretly placing any electronic monitoring device to track a person’s physical location without lawful consent.
The bill preserves several exceptions. It does not restrict monitoring by vehicle owners, lessors, lessees, or lienholders who consent; U.S. military personnel acting in official duties; parents, guardians, or persons in loco parentis tracking certain children or incapacitated individuals; mobile phone or data service providers; or manufacturer-installed devices. It also clarifies that the statute does not apply to automated license plate recognition systems.
Impact
SB 97 would expand Georgia’s privacy and surveillance law by expressly covering modern location-tracking technology, including GPS and other electronic monitoring devices. It would add new criminal prohibitions to Code Section 16-11-62 and create a specific carve-out for automated license plate recognition systems under Code Section 35-1-22. The bill would affect individuals using tracking devices, domestic violence or stalking situations involving protective orders, law enforcement-related surveillance, and family or custodial monitoring arrangements.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes, the measure appears to be framed as a privacy-protection bill with targeted exceptions rather than a broad surveillance restriction. Its structure suggests an effort to address concerns about clandestine tracking while preserving common lawful uses of monitoring technology. No formal vote history or transcript is available here to indicate broader legislative support or opposition.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the balance between privacy and legitimate monitoring. Supporters would favor the bill’s protections against covert tracking, especially in the context of stalking, domestic abuse, and protective orders. Potential concerns could come from law enforcement, vehicle owners, employers, or technology/service providers worried about how broadly “electronic monitoring device” is defined and whether the new prohibition could affect lawful tracking practices. The bill’s explicit exceptions for parents, military personnel, and service providers appear designed to address some of those concerns.