Maryland Medical Assistance Program and Health Insurance - Coverage for Orthoses and Prostheses (So Every Body Can Move Act)
HB0445 amends Maryland’s criminal law on interference with computer systems to add public safety answering points, including 911 call centers, to the list of protected entities. The bill makes it a crime to commit certain unauthorized computer-related acts with the intent to interrupt or impair the functioning of a public safety answering point, and it also separately prohibits acts that actually interrupt or impair such a facility. These new provisions are added to existing law that already covers interference aimed at state government, utilities, health care facilities, public schools, and other critical systems.
The bill also establishes penalties for these new offenses. A person who intentionally targets a public safety answering point faces felony punishment of up to 5 years in prison and/or a $25,000 fine, while a person whose conduct actually interrupts or impairs a public safety answering point faces felony punishment of up to 10 years in prison and/or a $50,000 fine. The law takes effect October 1, 2025, and is codified as an amendment to Criminal Law § 7-302.
The bill expands Maryland’s computer crime statute to expressly cover interference with public safety answering points, creating a new protected category under Criminal Law § 7-302(c) and adding corresponding felony penalties in § 7-302(d). This broadens the state’s ability to prosecute cyber or unauthorized-access conduct that disrupts emergency communications infrastructure, including 911 dispatch operations, and aligns those protections with existing safeguards for government, utilities, health care, and schools.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or vote details in the provided materials, the measure appears to have been treated as a public-safety and infrastructure-protection bill rather than a controversial policy change. The enacted language suggests a generally supportive posture toward strengthening penalties for interference with emergency response systems, with no visible evidence in the supplied record of organized opposition or divided voting.
The main substantive issue is the scope of the new offense: the bill reaches both conduct done with intent to impair a public safety answering point and conduct that actually causes impairment, which could raise questions about how broadly cyber-related activity is captured. Another possible point of concern is the severity of the felony penalties, especially the higher penalty for conduct that results in actual disruption. No specific opponents, amendments, or committee disputes are shown in the provided record, so any contention appears limited to the statutory breadth and punishment levels rather than partisan disagreement.