New York Senate Bill S03990

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/31/25
• Refer: 1/31/25
• Refer: 1/7/26

Caption

Relates to establishing the offense of false pretense.

Summary

S03990 would create a new crime in the Penal Law called “false pretense,” also described in the bill as the “e-impersonation prevention act.” The offense applies when a person knowingly and without consent impersonates another person through an internet website or other electronic means for the purpose of harming, intimidating, threatening, or defrauding that person. The bill defines a credible impersonation as one that a reasonable person would believe, or did believe, was the real person being impersonated. The bill also specifies that “electronic means” includes accessing another person’s email account or a social networking profile in that person’s name. A violation would be classified as a class D felony, and the bill would take effect on November 1 following enactment.

Impact

If enacted, the bill would amend the New York Penal Law by adding a new section 190.22 and creating a standalone felony offense for online or electronic impersonation. It would expand criminal liability to cover conduct involving email accounts, social media accounts, and other internet-based impersonation used to threaten, intimidate, defraud, or otherwise harm another person. The measure would primarily affect individuals accused of digital impersonation and could also be relevant to prosecutors, law enforcement, and victims of cyber harassment or identity-related abuse.

Sentiment

The available record shows the bill was introduced and referred to committee, but there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided. As a result, there is no documented debate or voting history to indicate support or opposition. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears aimed at addressing harmful online impersonation and protecting victims of electronic abuse.

Contention

No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials because there are no transcripts, amendments, or votes included. Potential areas of debate, based on the bill’s language, could include how broadly “impersonates,” “credible,” and “electronic means” are interpreted, and whether the class D felony penalty is proportionate to the conduct covered. However, these concerns are not attributed to any named legislator or stakeholder in the record provided.