SB 815 narrows Maryland’s criminal-history protections in occupational licensing law to apply only to two units within the Maryland Department of Labor: the State Board of Barbers and the State Board of Cosmetologists. For those licensing boards, the bill prohibits the department from requiring applicants to disclose certain criminal-history information on applications, including deferred adjudications, diversion participation, arrests not followed by conviction, sealed/vacated/dismissed/expunged/pardoned convictions, juvenile delinquency adjudications, certain misdemeanors, and older convictions that meet specified time thresholds. The bill also preserves and refines the general rule that a license or certificate may not be denied solely because of a prior conviction unless there is a direct relationship to the occupation or a direct and substantial threat to public safety, persons, or property.
The bill further expands the factors the department must consider when evaluating criminal history, adding education, training, and employment history before, during, and after imprisonment, and whether the occupation requires bonding. It keeps the existing policy favoring employment and licensure opportunities for ex-offenders, while maintaining exceptions for sex-offender-registry offenses and for convictions within the relevant time period. The act takes effect October 1, 2025.
In practical terms, SB 815 changes state licensing procedures by limiting who is covered by the criminal-history disclosure and anti-denial protections in this section of law, rather than applying them broadly across multiple state departments. It affects applicants for barbering and cosmetology licenses or certificates, and it constrains how the Maryland Department of Labor may design application forms and evaluate prior records for those professions.
The available voting history shows strong support: the Senate passed the bill on third reading unanimously, 42-0. No committee transcript excerpts were provided, but the favorable committee report and unanimous floor vote suggest the bill was generally viewed positively and as a targeted licensing reform.
The main point of contention implied by the text is scope. The bill reduces the statute’s reach from a broader set of state departments to only two licensing boards, which may reflect a policy choice to tailor criminal-record disclosure limits to specific occupations rather than extend them across all occupational licensing. Another potential issue is the balance between second-chance licensing policies and public-safety concerns, especially for convictions involving violence or fraud, which remain excluded from some protections.
SB 815 amends Criminal Procedure § 1-209 to narrow the definition of “department” for this licensing-and-criminal-history provision to only the State Board of Barbers and the State Board of Cosmetologists within the Maryland Department of Labor. It also adds a new prohibition on requiring applicants to disclose specified criminal-history events and expands the factors used in licensing decisions. The bill therefore changes application screening and denial standards for barbering and cosmetology licenses/certificates, while leaving the broader statutory framework in place for other covered areas only to the extent they are no longer included in this section.
The bill appears to have been received favorably overall. The committee report was favorable with amendments, and the Senate passed the bill unanimously on third reading, indicating broad bipartisan support. The available record suggests the measure was seen as a targeted occupational-licensing reform rather than a controversial overhaul.
The principal policy tension is between reducing barriers for people with criminal records and preserving public safety and consumer protection in licensed professions. Supporters of the bill likely favor second-chance employment and clearer limits on what applicants must disclose, while any critics would focus on whether narrowing the statute to only barbering and cosmetology is too limited or whether the new disclosure restrictions could reduce information available to licensing boards. The bill preserves exceptions for crimes of violence, sex-offender-registry offenses, and fraud-related offenses, which indicates an effort to address those concerns.