Bills: SJR 3, SB 5, SJR 36, SJR 3, SB 616, SB 565, SB 384, SB 5, SB 21, SB 72, SB 140, SB 262, SB 370, SB 372, SB 495, SB 627, SB 703, SB 764, SB 842, SB 971, SB 790, SB 767, SB 480, SB 1066, SR 44, SR 135, SR 171, SR 180, SR 185, SR 187, SR 188, SR 191, SR 197, SR 198, SR 199, SR 200

Keywords: dementia, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, research funding, state budget, prevention, healthcare, medical research, Dementia Prevention and Research Institute, research institute, funding, grants, state health initiatives, aquifer, water management, Edwards Aquifer, sustainability, regulatory framework, SB 565, Texas Water Code

Transcript Highlights:

• WHEN IT COMES TO CYBER SECURITY, FLORIDIANS' PERSONAL DATA AND THE IT INFRASTRUCTURE OF OUR STATE, OUR
• DATA SHOWS THAT AUTISM IS IMPACTING MORE AND MORE FAMILIES ACROSS OUR STATE AT AN ALARMING RATE.
• THE MORE DATA WE HAVE ON WHEN AND HOW THIS EVIL IS HAPPENING, THE BETTER CHANCE WE HAVE TO STAY ONE STEP

Bills: SJR3, SB5, SJR36, SJR3, SB616, SB565, SB384, SB5, SB21, SB72, SB140, SB262, SB370, SB372, SB495, SB627, SB703, SB764, SB842, SB971, SB790, SB767, SB480, SB1066, SR44, SR135, SR171, SR180, SR185, SR187, SR188, SR191, SR197, SR198, SR199, SR200

Keywords: dementia, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, research funding, state budget, prevention, healthcare, medical research, Dementia Prevention and Research Institute, research institute, funding, grants, state health initiatives, aquifer, water management, Edwards Aquifer, sustainability, regulatory framework, SB 565, Texas Water Code

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:14:41.959> is other states is that um this data is other states is that um this data is
• would be protecting voter privacy would be protecting voter privacy um<00:26:56.320> as<00
• overtly clarified what was public data overtly clarified what was public data from<00:31:06.399>
• there needs to be an issue about data there needs to be an issue about data privacy<01:15:05.280
• > in<01:15:05.440> the<01:15:05.560> voting privacy in the voting privacy in the

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill is here to be able to protect the privacy of individuals' health data and protect them.
• Further, concerns have risen about the health privacy data and controlled substance utilization...
• For survivors, the sale of their location data is more than just an invasion of their privacy.
• intents of the bill that we're doing to safeguard your privacy data is adhered to.
• And data privacy is so scarce, to be honest with you, in our daily lives.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills related to reproductive access, child safety online, immigration enforcement in schools, health privacy, location data, digital provenance, reparations, and age assurance. AB 54 would protect the medication abortion supply chain and shield providers and others from liability; AB 1137 would strengthen reporting and enforcement tools for child sexual abuse material on social media; AB 49 would limit ICE activity at California public schools; AB 82 would expand privacy and safety protections for gender-affirming care patients and providers; AB 1355 would restrict the collection, use, and sale of precise location data; AB 853 would expand provenance requirements for AI-generated and authentic content; AB 62 would create a pathway for restitution for racially biased eminent domain takings; and AB 1043 would create a device-based age assurance framework for online services. Supporters generally framed the bills as necessary responses to current harms: reproductive rights advocates emphasized California’s role as a safe haven; child safety witnesses described the persistence and re-victimization caused by CSAM online; immigrant rights and education advocates said schools should remain safe from immigration enforcement; health and LGBTQ+ advocates stressed privacy and safety risks tied to tracking and harassment; privacy and consumer groups backed limits on location data and stronger provenance tools; and reparations advocates said AB 62 would help address historic injustices. Opposition came from family policy, tech, business, law enforcement, and industry groups, who raised concerns about safety claims, constitutional issues, implementation burdens, transparency, law enforcement access, and the need to preserve existing privacy frameworks and voluntary standards. The committee members largely expressed support for the policy goals while noting implementation concerns on some measures. Several members asked for or were offered coauthor status on bills. AB 1137, AB 54, AB 49, AB 82, AB 1355, AB 853, and AB 62 all received do-pass votes to Appropriations, with some members voting no or not voting on certain bills. AB 1355 and AB 853 were advanced with amendments or ongoing work promised with opponents, and AB 1043 was presented with discussion of possible amendments on parental consent and age assurance details, though the transcript cuts off before final action on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• That includes the raw data, anonymized data from... ...that we publish all results of our findings.
• That includes the raw data, anonymized data from participants, so that any third parties can independently
• National data paints a similarly troubling picture.
• All told, Californians for Consumer Privacy is really focused on strengthening privacy rights and improving
• We look forward to continuing... ...privacy and safety goals.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on privacy, AI, consumer protection, and public safety. AB 1979 would require a licensed health care professional to retain final clinical judgment when using AI tools in health care and would limit chatbot access to medical records; supporters, including nurses and TechEquity, said it preserves human decision-making, while hospitals and industry groups opposed it unless amended, citing burdens and training concerns. The bill passed 6-1 and was placed on call. AB 2624 would expand the Safe at Home confidentiality program to immigrant service providers and workers facing harassment and doxing; supporters described threats against advocates and their families, while one senator raised concerns about a private right of action and penalties. The bill passed 4-1 and was placed on call for further committees. AB 2103 would make Engaged California a permanent statewide public engagement program; supporters said it broadens civic participation and transparency, while concerns were raised about partisan balance in topic selection. It passed 6-0 and was placed on call to Appropriations. The committee also considered AB 2, which would set statutory damages and other financial accountability measures for large social media platforms when negligence causing harm to children is proven in court. The author and supporters, including a parent who lost her daughter and child-safety advocates, argued that stronger remedies are needed because social media design features are harming children and existing enforcement has been insufficient. Opponents, including TechNet, CCIA, CalChamber, and others, argued the bill blurs content and conduct, could increase litigation, and is unnecessary given existing lawsuits and verdicts. Several senators said the bill was a consumer-protection measure and supported it; it passed 5-0 and was placed on call. AB 883, as amended, would use California’s Delete Act/DROP system to help elected officials and judges remove personal information from data brokers, while also shortening the deletion timeline for all Californians from 45 to 30 days. Supporters said the bill responds to rising threats against public servants and improves privacy tools broadly; some opponents removed or softened opposition after amendments, though CalChamber and CCIA remained opposed unless amended, largely over the private right of action. The bill passed 4-0 and was placed on call. The committee then recessed briefly before taking up AB 2023, a chatbot safety bill for children that would require age verification, safety audits, default protections, parental controls, crisis-response measures, and limits on targeted ads and data sharing. Supporters said it builds on prior AI and child-safety legislation and is needed to prevent harms like self-harm and manipulation; opponents raised concerns about vague harm standards, audit requirements, and liability. The hearing continued with testimony and committee discussion, but no final vote on AB 2023 was shown in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• privacy that have been created through government surveillance and mass data collection.
• I'm sure we will be hearing more about data privacy and the months to come.
• I'm sure we will be hearing more about data privacy in the months to come. Thank you.
• But again, I understand that there are data privacy requirements for each.
• You know, it's just going to be a mess, etc., data privacy concerns, etc.

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: The committee held a series of informational briefings on information management and technology issues. It first heard from ACLU representatives on data privacy, who argued that Oregon should strengthen protections against private data brokers, government purchases of personal data, reverse warrants, automatic license plate readers, and local police surveillance. They urged data minimization, limits on data sales and retention, and broader transparency and accountability measures. Members asked about practical uses of license plate readers, state sales of data, and how Oregon’s approach compares with other states; the presenters said similar proposals have been adopted elsewhere, including data minimization in Maryland and a state version of the Fourth Amendment Is Not for Sale Act in Montana. The committee then received a detailed update from the Department of Administrative Services and Enterprise Information Services on licensing system modernization for 14 boards and commissions with the most immediate need. DAS said it is seeking a shared procurement approach through an RFP that would create either one scalable system or two tiers of systems, depending on agency needs and security requirements, with contracts expected by September. Committee members emphasized the need for a more unified, user-friendly statewide login and service experience for businesses and residents, and raised concerns about small agencies “figuring it out on their own” without sufficient cybersecurity or technical expertise. EIS said it is overseeing the investment review, security and architecture review, and future implementation planning, and noted that multiple agency requests may still come back to the legislature in the next session. The committee also discussed a revised cybersecurity incident notification concept. Staff explained that the earlier bill had raised stakeholder concerns, so the co-chairs directed further interim work with the Oregon Cybersecurity Advisory Council and other local government and K-12 stakeholders. The goal is a narrower, voluntary “911-style” notification process that would let public bodies alert peers and potentially receive assistance after cyber incidents; a temporary voluntary process is being tested now, with a work group developing language for possible 2027 consideration. Finally, the committee heard updates from the new state chief data officer on data governance, data sharing, geospatial work, and the state transparency website, followed by a briefing on data centers from NCSL and the Technology Association of Oregon. The data officer described efforts to expand data inventories, data governance plans, data literacy, and interagency sharing, along with statewide aerial imagery, geospatial standards, and the open data portal. The data center discussion focused on national and state trends, including rapid growth in data centers, rising electricity and water demand, and legislative responses such as new rate classes, reporting requirements, and cost-allocation rules to protect ratepayers. No votes were taken; the meeting was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've done a lot of work with data privacy.
• We've done a lot of work with data privacy.
• We've done a lot of work with data privacy.
• We've done a lot of work with data privacy.
• We've done a lot of work with data privacy.

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Roll Call: 00:21 HB 480 Discussion: 01:40 HB 480 Voting: 02:36 HB 577 Discussion: 05:14 HB 577 Voting: 08:38 HB 692 Discussion: 09:23 HB 692 Voting: 14:00 HB 869 Discussion: 15:21 HB 869 Voting: 18:56, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And data. this is a a data privacy bill.
• This is uh data privacy and how uh local jurisdictions handle that data privacy.
• This is uh data privacy and how uh local jurisdictions handle that data privacy.
• This is uh data privacy and how uh local jurisdictions handle that data privacy.
• This is uh data privacy and how uh local jurisdictions handle that data privacy.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House File 4205, as amended, was heard and then re-referred to the Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee. Representative Tabke said the bill is intended to protect Minnesotans’ private data tied to license plate reader systems by requiring warrants for out-of-state access, limiting dissemination of privately collected data, and adding reporting and oversight. He said the amendment was substantive and was adopted before the bill was discussed. Tabke also said he was open to changes, including revisiting the audit requirement, and noted the bill should still allow law enforcement to use license plate data for investigations. John Beeler of the ACLU of Minnesota testified in support, arguing that automatic license plate reader use has expanded far beyond what the 2015 statute contemplated and that third-party vendors have complicated data practices and accountability. He said the bill would modernize the law, require public disclosure of data-sharing relationships, and ensure private vendors are subject to data obligations. Jeff Potts of the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association opposed the bill as written, saying LPR technology has been important in investigations, including a recent child abduction case, but that the annual audit requirement would be too costly for small agencies and could make the technology unaffordable. He said the association was open to further discussions on guardrails but opposed the bill in its current form. Members raised questions about what data is actually returned by a license plate query versus an LPR hit, with Representative Duran arguing the bill conflated limited registration information with broader private data. Representative Feist supported the bill, saying the public should not trust Flock and that the issue is the cumulative tracking of people’s movements, not just isolated data points. Representative Hudson said the bill raised valid questions but might unintentionally hinder investigations, and he requested a roll call. The committee ultimately adopted the A1 amendment and moved the bill forward on a roll call vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• contemplating or have changed their data contemplating or have changed their data privacy<00:05:
• California has a whole division that protects the privacy of the data privacy of all of their consumers
• , the data privacy, the data of<00:25:01.640> the<00:25:01.720> consumers<00:25:02.360>
• > around their data and their privacy around their data and their privacy around that. that. that
• c> all<00:26:29.560> of<00:26:29.640> their the data privacy of all of their the data

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House first returned to Senate Bill 71, a consumer data privacy and online surveillance bill. Members debated a proposed amendment that would have removed language allowing companies to rely on consumer consent to sell certain sensitive data. Supporters argued consent pop-ups and terms-of-service notices are not meaningful consent and that sensitive data should be categorically protected, citing Maryland and other states. Opponents, including the committee presenter, said the bill was a carefully negotiated compromise needed to establish Vermont’s first data privacy framework and warned that adopting the amendment could jeopardize passage in the Senate or with the governor. The committee reported the amendment unfavorable on a 9-0 straw poll, the House rejected the amendment, and then approved the committee’s recommended proposal of amendment by roll call vote, 129-3. During questioning on S. 71, members discussed the bill’s applicability thresholds, with the presenter explaining that the 35,000-consumer threshold was modeled on Connecticut, while lower 3,000 thresholds for sensitive data and data sales were based on business testimony and intended to capture smaller entities such as accountants, lawyers, nonprofits, and trade associations that share or sell lists. Members also asked about the bill’s many exemptions, which were described as covering entities already regulated by state or federal law, including health care entities under HIPAA and banking and insurance sectors. The presenter and supporters emphasized that the bill still requires clear privacy notices, limits data collection to what is reasonable and disclosed, and gives consumers rights to opt out, correct, and delete data. After the roll call vote, the House ordered third reading, suspended rules to place S. 71 in all remaining stages, passed it in concurrence with proposal of amendment, and suspended rules to message the action to the Senate forthwith. The House then moved to Senate Bill 193, relating to establishing a forensic facility for certain criminal justice-involved persons. The committee presenter from South Burlington previewed that the bill would create a permanent forensic facility, with a separate amendment expected to address interim arrangements while the facility is being developed. The transcript ends as the House begins second reading of S. 193 and the committee reports are introduced, with further debate not shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• privacy and, uh, affirmative consent when it comes to data.
• uphold data privacy and uh affirmative uphold data privacy and uh affirmative consent<00:04:51.919
• Those are some of the ways we input data and then we get data out.
• Those are some of the ways we input data and then we get data out.
• Those are some of the ways we input data and then we get data out.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So some history quickly, beginning in 1974 with a discussion about data privacy, which is really on my
• So some history quickly, beginning in 1974 with a discussion about data privacy, which is really on my
• Beginning in 1974, there was a discussion about data privacy.
• The legislature decided it should take on the issue of data privacy.
• The legislature decided it should take on the issue of data privacy.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• addressing the privacy laws and all of the current states standing on privacy laws, as I said before,
• addressing the privacy laws and all of the current states standing on privacy laws, as I said before,
• from this data, don't combine it with personally identifiable data from any other source.
• addressing the privacy laws and all of the current states standing on privacy laws, as I said before,
• addressing the privacy laws and all of the current states standing on privacy laws, as I said before,

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It also requires mandatory privacy and data security training for every employee who accesses ALPR information
• It mandates privacy and security training, and it limits the indefinite retention of location data belonging
• It mandates privacy and security training, and it limits the indefinite retention of location data belonging
• And really, we're comparing perceived harm of capturing data and the alleged threat to privacy.
• retention policy for ALPR data.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:03:56.960> privacy steps to give residents data privacy steps to give residents data privacy
• data privacy statute to comprehensive data privacy statute to take<00:15:41.440> effect,<00:15
• <00:17:34.880> privacy country to develop data privacy country to develop data privacy frameworks
• process that helped New Hampshire's data process that helped New Hampshire's data privacy<00:17:
• Um, I also know that this committee has evaluated data privacy and data protection and, um, we passed

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• First, we protect the data of our patients and health care providers.
• First, comprehensive patient autonomy and medical privacy.
• The bill before us intends to focus on data, and privacy protections, on the services at most risk of
• Focus on data and privacy protections on the services at most risk of persecution.
• If we stretch the privacy net too far, we risk breaking it entirely.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The House first took up several routine matters, adopting resolutions recognizing the 30th anniversary of the Glasgow Lands Scottish Festival and congratulating Father Gerald Francis Finnegan, S.J., on his long ministry. Members also suspended Joint Rule 12 to allow a petition establishing a sick leave bank for a Massachusetts State Police employee to go to the Committee on Public Service. The chamber then moved to Senate Bill 2543, An Act Strengthening Health Care Protections in the Commonwealth, and adopted the Ways and Means amendment before sending the bill to third reading. Later, after the bill was released from third reading, the House considered it on final passage. Supporters described the measure as protecting reproductive and gender-affirming care, patient data, providers, and Massachusetts residents from out-of-state interference, while also incorporating federal emergency care requirements. Amendment 4, which would have barred state funding for campaign ads discouraging pregnant women from using pregnancy resource centers, was rejected. Amendment 8, which would have broadened the bill to include refusals of care and other preventive care for adults and minors, was also rejected after opposition argued it could allow one parent to block care for a child. Amendment 6, as changed, narrowing certain data protections to abortion-related care, IVF, and gender-affirming care, was adopted. The House also adopted Amendment 7, clarifying that businesses handling information for payment, treatment, or health care operations would not violate the bill, and Amendment 9, directing the Commissioner of Public Health to convene a technical advisory group to review a section of the General Laws. After these amendments, the bill passed to be engrossed by a vote of 136-23. The House then observed a moment of silence for victims of the Gabriel House assisted living fire in Fall River and adjourned to meet the next day in informal session.

Transcript Highlights:

• So again, this bill explicitly requires aggregate data only, consistent with existing privacy protections
• So again, this bill explicitly requires aggregate data only, consistent with existing privacy protections
• So again, this bill explicitly requires aggregate data only, consistent with existing privacy protections
• So again, this bill explicitly requires aggregate data only, consistent with existing privacy protections
• So again, this bill explicitly requires aggregate data only, consistent with existing privacy protections

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• externally with any data centers whatsoever.
• How do you double-check that that data is? That's a wonderful question.
• You don't run out any data from a data center?
• The more data we have and the more data we're able to train, whether it's a large learning model or language
• And we've got providers that cannot include identifiable data in the provenance data about a person unless

Bills: SB1786

Keywords: artificial intelligence, content verification, provenance data, transparency, digital content, 1182, all

Summary: The committee first heard a presentation from Sonora Quest Laboratories on how the company is using artificial intelligence and innovation in clinical lab work. Testimony emphasized that AI is already being used in digital pathology, cytology, genetics, genomics, predictive analytics, and quality control, with a strong focus on human oversight, validation, and closed, secure systems that keep patient data in-house. Speakers said AI can improve accuracy, speed diagnosis, reduce repeat testing, support precision medicine and pharmacogenomics, and potentially help with rare disease management and drug selection, while also noting the need for governance and safeguards. Members asked questions about accuracy, safeguards, data security, whether AI could reduce repeat specimen collection, expand to other hospital labs, and how AI might affect treatment decisions such as step therapy and pharmacogenomics. The presenters said AI outputs are reviewed by specialists, that the systems are validated and monitored, and that the organization uses a closed ecosystem with no external data sharing. They also discussed future possibilities such as digital twins, earlier cancer detection, and more tailored medication choices, while acknowledging that AI is still developing and must be used carefully. The committee then took up Senate Bill 1786, as amended, which requires covered providers using generative AI to add provenance data to AI-created or significantly modified video, image, or audio content, using methods like watermarking or metadata, with exceptions for minor edits and certain interactive or non-user-generated content. The amendment clarified that identifiable individual information generally cannot be included unless the user opts in, protected trade secrets, and set an effective date of February 1, 2027. After discussion about consumer transparency, scope, and possible legal issues, the committee adopted the amendment and voted 4-2 with one absent to give SB 1786 as amended a do pass recommendation.

Transcript Highlights:

• What about user data, Ms. Williams?
• And POP servers, as a technical. data center that brings the data closer to the end user.
• It would have American data, it would have Chinese users. of data and it would be on Chinese soil.
• Here they're willing to build data centers, store data in China, they are willing explicitly to give
• When the decision is being made about exposing American privacy material and data so that the Chinese

Keywords: Meta, Facebook, whistleblower, regulation, China, user data, artificial intelligence, testimony, Congress

Summary: The meeting of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism focused on oversight of Meta's foreign relations and representations to Congress. An essential witness, Sarah Wynne-Williams, a former executive at Facebook, provided testimony outlining significant concerns about the company's practices and its complicity in aiding oppressive regimes. The atmosphere was charged, with ongoing debates about the regulation of big tech companies and the ethical implications of their policies. The committee explored topics such as user data management, whistleblower retaliation, and the need for legislative measures to protect users and enhance accountability in the tech sector. A notable point of contention was Facebook's alleged cooperation with the Chinese government regarding the dissemination of user data and AI tools, leading to serious ethical implications.

Transcript Highlights:

• It also requires mandatory privacy and data security training for every employee who accesses ALPR information
• It requires mandatory privacy and data security training for every employee who accesses ALPR information
• unaware of who they are sharing data with or the reasons that their data is being searched, despite
• And really, we're comparing perceived harm of capturing data and the alleged threat to privacy.
• retention policy for ALPR data.

Summary: The Assembly Transportation Committee met first as a subcommittee due to the lack of a quorum, then later obtained a quorum and took up several bills. The committee heard SB 1064, which would reduce the frequency of Clean Truck Check testing for low-use heavy-duty vehicles; supporters said it would ease burdens on rural agricultural businesses, while clean air advocates opposed it as weakening an important emissions program. The bill was approved and sent to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. The committee also heard SB 1174, which would give Caltrans bid preferences to construction firms with employee stock ownership plans; supporters argued it would build worker wealth and improve project quality, while contractor groups opposed it as likely to raise costs and reduce competition. That bill was approved and sent to the Assembly Judiciary Committee. The consent calendar items SB 607, SB 962, and SB 990 were also approved. The committee then heard SB 1279, which would allow Long Beach to place additional speed safety cameras on Pacific Coast Highway. Long Beach officials and several safety and advocacy groups supported the bill, citing high fatality rates and repeated pedestrian crashes on that corridor, while some members raised concerns about fines, affordability, and whether cameras would address pedestrian-related collisions. The bill passed as amended to the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee. SB 1213, the Clean Truck Transportation Act, would require more price transparency for medium- and heavy-duty zero-emission truck incentives and direct agencies to explore alternative financing tools; supporters said it would improve affordability and competition, while one manufacturer and the trucking association raised implementation concerns. It passed to the Assembly Natural Resources Committee. The committee also heard SB 1013, which would tighten rules for automated license plate reader use by limiting retention to 30 days, requiring audits and training, and restricting access and hot list use. Privacy advocates supported the bill as overdue accountability, while law enforcement groups argued the retention limit would hinder investigations and that some technical definitions needed work. The bill passed to the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee. SB 1315, dealing with advanced driver assistance systems, would prevent automakers from disabling a consumer’s ability to drive their own vehicle through software updates and would encourage DMV testing questions about ADAS responsibilities; after amendments, industry opposition softened and the bill passed to the Assembly Judiciary Committee. Finally, SB 1246, on autonomous vehicle emergency response, would require U.S.-based remote drivers, quicker on-scene response, and better coordination with local agencies; first responders and labor groups supported it, while AV industry groups remained opposed unless amended. The bill passed to the Assembly Communications and Conveyance Committee. The transcript ended as the committee began hearing SB 1250, a planning bill to incorporate wildlife connectivity into transportation asset management, with the sponsor and supporters explaining it would improve safety and habitat planning without mandating specific projects.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, so for example, there's a comprehensive data privacy statute, 507H, which is now law in New Hampshire
• Um, so for example, there's a comprehensive data privacy statute, 507H, which is now law in New Hampshire
• Um, so for example, there's a comprehensive data privacy statute, 507H, which is now law in New Hampshire
• privacy, and fairness don't matter. privacy, and fairness don't matter.
• They utilized data from criminal incident reports on safety and privacy violations related to assault

Keywords: 1191, senate, all