Pennsylvania House Bill HB1822

Pennsylvania 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 8/26/25
• Refer: 8/26/25

Caption

Providing for protection of personal data of certain public servants; imposing duties on data brokers regarding personal data; and providing for civil enforcement.

Summary

HB1822 creates a new chapter in Title 44 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes establishing a “Public Servant Data Privacy” framework. The bill is aimed at judges, elected and appointed public officials, and certain associated persons such as family members, co-residents, and direct-support staff. It allows a covered person or authorized agent to notify a data broker and demand that the broker stop disclosing specified protected information, including home addresses, home telephone numbers, personal email addresses, Social Security numbers, driver’s license numbers, and vehicle identifiers. Once a valid notice is received, a data broker must stop disclosing or redisclosing the protected information within 20 business days. The protection generally lasts for the life of a principal person and for associated persons while connected to the principal person and for 10 years afterward. The bill also creates enforcement mechanisms, including civil liability, liquidated damages of at least $1,000 per violation, attorney fees, punitive damages for willful or reckless conduct, and misdemeanor criminal penalties for reckless or intentional violations. It applies immediately upon enactment.

Impact

The bill would add a new privacy chapter to Pennsylvania law and impose affirmative duties on data brokers operating in the state or disclosing covered information. It changes the legal treatment of certain public servants’ personal data by requiring removal or suppression of protected information after notice, even if that information is otherwise publicly available in records or online. It also creates a private right of action and authorizes criminal enforcement, expanding both civil and criminal exposure for noncompliant data brokers while preserving disclosure for authorized transactions and certain candidate-related filing or residency challenges.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests the bill was supported by a narrow majority in the House Judiciary Committee, with repeated 14-12 votes to adopt amendments and report the bill as amended. That pattern indicates the measure advanced on a partisan or closely divided basis rather than with broad bipartisan consensus. The bill text itself reflects a strong protective rationale centered on threats, intimidation, and violence against public servants and their families, suggesting generally favorable sentiment among supporters who view the proposal as a safety and anti-harassment measure.

Contention

The main point of contention appears to be the balance between public safety and access to personal information. Supporters emphasize the risks posed by data brokers and the need to shield judges, lawmakers, and other officials from harassment, stalking, and violence. Opponents are likely to focus on the breadth of the restrictions, the fact that the bill can override public availability of information, and the compliance burden and liability exposure imposed on data brokers. The committee votes also suggest disagreement over amendments and the scope of the reporting language, though no transcript is available to identify specific arguments.