HB3152 creates the General Assembly Privacy Act, a new Illinois law aimed at shielding members of the Illinois General Assembly and certain family members from public disclosure of personal information. The bill would require government agencies, upon receiving a written request from a legislator, to remove specified personal information from publicly available content within five business days and to stop republishing that information. It also makes that information exempt from the Freedom of Information Act unless the legislator consents to disclosure.
The bill also reaches private actors. After a written request, persons, businesses, and associations would have 72 hours to remove a legislator’s personal information from the Internet, stop making it available on their websites or subsidiary sites, and stop transferring it to others. The bill specifically references internet phone directories, search engines, data aggregators, and internet service providers, and it authorizes injunctive or declaratory relief, plus attorney’s fees and costs, for violations. It further prohibits soliciting, selling, or trading a legislator’s personal information online with the intent to create an imminent and serious threat to the legislator or immediate family.
HB3152 would also create a criminal offense: knowingly posting the personal information of a legislator’s immediate family on the Internet, when the poster knows or reasonably should know it poses an imminent and serious threat and the posting is a proximate cause of bodily injury or death, would be a Class 3 felony. The bill defines covered personal information broadly to include home address, phone numbers, email address, Social Security number, tax ID number, financial account numbers, marital status, and the identities of minor children.
The bill’s impact on state law would be significant because it adds a new privacy regime for elected officials, limits disclosure by state and local government bodies, and creates new civil and criminal liabilities for online publication of protected information. It also narrows public access to certain records by carving out an FOIA exemption for protected personal information once a request is made. In practical terms, the bill would impose compliance duties on government agencies and on online intermediaries or other entities that maintain or distribute personal information.
There is no recorded committee debate or vote history in the provided materials, so overall sentiment cannot be measured from official action. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears motivated by safety and anti-doxxing concerns, but it also raises potential concerns about free speech, public records access, and the breadth of restrictions on internet publication. The main point of contention is likely the balance between protecting legislators and their families from threats versus limiting public access to information and imposing broad takedown obligations on private entities.
HB3152 would create a new statutory framework in Illinois governing the privacy of General Assembly members and their immediate family members. It would require state and local government agencies, and certain private entities, to remove or stop publishing specified personal information after a written request, and it would exempt that information from FOIA once protected. The bill also adds civil remedies and a Class 3 felony for certain harmful online disclosures, thereby expanding both administrative compliance duties and potential legal exposure for publishers and intermediaries.
No committee transcripts or votes were provided, so there is no recorded legislative sentiment to summarize from debate or roll call. From the bill text, the measure appears to be framed as a safety and privacy protection bill, suggesting support from those concerned about harassment or doxxing of legislators. At the same time, the absence of recorded discussion means there is no evidence here of formal opposition or amendment activity, though the bill’s restrictions suggest it could draw scrutiny from transparency, media, and civil liberties advocates.
The likely central contention is between personal safety and public transparency. Supporters would likely emphasize the need to protect legislators and their families from doxxing, stalking, and threats, while critics may object that the bill restricts access to public information, burdens internet platforms and data brokers, and could chill lawful publication. The criminal penalty for posting family members’ personal information, along with the broad FOIA exemption and mandatory takedown provisions, are the most likely flashpoints.