Vermont Continues Editing Version of Daniel's Law Amidst Private Right of Action Concerns
Vermont's attempt at copying New Jersey's Daniel’s Law has faced much deliberation in the legislature over the measure's private right of action. Bill sponsor Rep. Monique Priestly (D) has tried to counter that by increasing the cure period and allowing state attorney general enforcement, she said during a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting Wednesday.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Priestly was hearing arguments about "frivolous lawsuits," where if "the companies don't comply [in time] then they're facing potentially thousands of requests." As such, "One of the things we did to address that was, one: adding an AG piece. But then also adding in the time delay. In some states, it's 48, 72 hours [from when] the request goes and [the information] has to be removed. In our case, it's 30 days."
H-342 aims at protecting judges and other officials and their families from stalkers and extremists. It is modeled after a New Jersey privacy law (see 2503110077). When asked why elected officials were not included on the list of covered persons, Priestly said "it's kind of similar to legislative pay," where the "legislative body is trying to give itself something," and there is criticism of it.
The original Daniel's Law is facing review by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals over First Amendment claims; some privacy lawyers believe the statute has been abused to shake down data brokers for money (see 2504040031). The Vermont legislature has echoed the fears of frivolous lawsuits in earlier discussions on the bill (see 2503120025). Despite these concerns, H-342 passed Vermont's House on March 28 (see 2503140065).
After hearing feedback from the community, "we added more days to the cure period," Priestly said. We "really tried to think of any different path we could" take to "make it so that it is both fair for the person who needs to take the actions" to remove their information "but also try to be fair to the data brokers and the time it takes to do this."
Sen. Nader Hashim (D), vice chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, asked why there isn't an option for private citizens to remove their personal information from data brokers as well. Priestly said a comprehensive privacy bill would cover everyone, but it is a struggle to pass, and so she wanted to introduce something specifically for those at "heightened risk and immediate concern."