A BILL to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Article 9 of Chapter 65 of Title 3.2 a section numbered 3.2-6573.2, relating to establishment of Animal Cruelty Conviction List.
HB673 directs the Executive Secretary of the Supreme Court of Virginia to create a separate, publicly viewable Animal Cruelty List on the state’s online case information system. The list would function as a database of people charged or convicted on or after July 1, 2026, for specified animal-related offenses, including cruelty to animals, animal fighting, maiming/killing/poisoning an animal, and killing or injuring a police animal. The bill requires the list to include the offender’s name, the offense, and the date and jurisdiction of the charge or conviction.
The list must be available no later than January 1, 2028, and would be added to the existing case information system established under § 17.1-293.1. In practical terms, the bill expands public access to criminal case information by creating a specialized registry focused on animal cruelty-related offenses. It does not create new criminal penalties or change the underlying offenses, but it does add a new public reporting and tracking mechanism for those offenses.
HB673 would amend Virginia law by adding a new section to Title 3.2 establishing an Animal Cruelty Conviction List within the state’s online court case information system. The measure affects the Supreme Court of Virginia’s Executive Secretary by assigning responsibility for building and maintaining the list, and it affects individuals charged or convicted of the listed offenses by making their names and case details publicly searchable. The bill also implicates privacy and public-records concerns because it broadens the visibility of criminal allegations and convictions related to animal cruelty and police animal offenses.
The available legislative record shows limited formal debate and no recorded votes, but the bill’s structure suggests a policy goal of increasing transparency and deterrence for animal cruelty offenses. The absence of committee transcripts makes it difficult to identify detailed support or opposition, though the proposal appears to have been framed as a public accountability measure rather than a punitive criminal-law change. Its referral history ending with the bill left in committee indicates that it did not advance, but the text itself reflects a straightforward, enforcement-oriented approach.
The main likely point of contention is whether creating a separate public list of charged or convicted persons is an appropriate use of the court information system, especially because it includes people who have merely been charged, not only convicted. Critics could raise concerns about reputational harm, due process, and the long-term public posting of case information, while supporters would likely emphasize transparency, deterrence, and protection of animals and police animals. Another possible issue is administrative burden on the court system, since the Executive Secretary would need to create and maintain a new searchable database by the stated deadline.