HB1331 amends Oklahoma’s trespass statute for critical infrastructure facilities. The bill keeps the existing misdemeanor and felony penalties for unauthorized entry, loitering, and damaging or tampering with critical infrastructure, but expands and clarifies what locations qualify as protected facilities. It defines “loiter” and broadens the list of covered sites to include a wide range of energy, utility, transportation, communications, industrial, and public safety-related properties.
Under the bill, a person who willfully trespasses, enters, or loiters on protected property without permission may be charged with a misdemeanor, while trespass with intent to damage, destroy, vandalize, deface, tamper with equipment, or impede operations remains a felony. Separate felony penalties also remain for actually damaging or tampering with equipment at a critical infrastructure facility, and organizations found to conspire in such offenses may face enhanced fines. The bill also expressly includes prisons and county-owned property such as courthouses and detention centers within the protected category.
The bill’s impact on state law is to broaden the scope of Oklahoma’s critical infrastructure protections and increase the range of facilities where unauthorized presence can trigger criminal liability. It would affect protesters, trespassers, and others entering fenced or posted sites, as well as owners and operators of utilities, energy facilities, transportation hubs, communications infrastructure, correctional facilities, and county government properties. The bill is set to take effect November 1, 2025, if enacted.
There is little recorded legislative debate in the available materials, and no committee transcript or vote history is provided. Based on the bill text, the measure appears aimed at strengthening security and deterrence around infrastructure and government facilities. Because the bill expands criminal exposure to more types of property, likely points of concern would include civil liberties, protest activity, and the breadth of the definition of critical infrastructure, though no specific opposition is documented in the available record.
Overall sentiment in the available record appears neutral to supportive, with the bill framed as a public safety and infrastructure protection measure rather than a controversial policy change. The absence of recorded votes or committee discussion limits the ability to identify organized support or opposition, but the bill’s structure suggests a focus on enforcement and deterrence.
HB1331 would amend 21 O.S. 2021, Section 1792, by expanding the definition of “critical infrastructure facility” and clarifying prohibited conduct on or around those facilities. It would extend criminal trespass protections to additional categories of property, including prisons and county-owned facilities, and would continue to impose misdemeanor or felony penalties depending on the conduct and intent involved. The bill would therefore broaden the set of locations where unauthorized entry, loitering, or sabotage-related conduct can be prosecuted under Oklahoma law.
The available record shows little direct legislative discussion, no recorded votes, and no committee transcript, so there is no documented controversy in the materials provided. On its face, the bill is presented as a security-oriented measure intended to protect infrastructure and public facilities from trespass and sabotage. The overall tone of the bill suggests a generally supportive posture toward stronger penalties and broader facility protections, with no explicit opposition captured in the available history.
The main potential point of contention is the bill’s expanded definition of critical infrastructure, which now includes a broad array of energy, communications, transportation, industrial, correctional, and county government properties. Critics could view the expansion as too broad or as increasing criminal penalties for protest-related activity or other expressive conduct near fenced or posted sites. Supporters would likely emphasize the need to deter trespass, vandalism, and interference with essential services and public facilities. No specific opposing lawmakers, groups, or arguments are identified in the provided materials.