In 2020, New Jersey enacted “Daniel’s Law,” prohibiting the public disclosure of personal information belonging to active, formerly active, and retired judicial officers, prosecutors, law enforcement officers, and their immediate family members. The law was signed by former Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy in November 2020 following the tragic murder of Daniel Anderl, the son of a federal judge after the killer was able to obtain their home address online. In the years since, heightened security concerns surrounding judges, prosecutors, and elected officials have prompted lawmakers nationwide to reassess how personal data about public servants is collected, displayed, and removed online.
2023 Expansion
Daniel’s law was expanded in 2023; key provisions of this expansion include:
- Authorized Individuals: Permits covered individuals to designate authorized individuals or entities to act on their behalf in requesting the removal or suppression of protected personal information.
- Assignees: These persons or entities can also serve as assignees to exercise the covered person’s legal rights.
- Compliance Period: Once a request has been made, entities have 10 days to remove the personal information.
- Damages: Actual damages of not less than $1,000 penalty per violation, punitive damages for reckless disregard of the law, reasonable attorney’s fees and any other preliminary and equitable relief as determined by the court.
A, perhaps unintended, result of these provisions has been a flurry of litigation after companies acting as authorized persons and assignees submitted requests on behalf of tens of thousands of clients en masse, reports the National Law Review. Attempts to change the law to reign in these lawsuits have so far been unsuccessful.
Potential Future Expansions
This session New Jersey lawmakers are considering numerous related bills including AB 2257 and SB 1291, which would expand the law to cover victim support advocates and victim support care providers. Other legislation, AB 3609 and SB 2783, would expand the law to cover court administrators and members of the legislature while also requiring the Office of Information Privacy to create an online portal for prohibiting the disclosure of personal information by private covered entities.
Similar Efforts in Other States
A number of states across the country are considering legislation similar to Daniel’s law including:
- California, which is considering AB 302, which would require the California Privacy Protection Agency to obtain a list of state and local elected officials as well as judges. The agency would then be required to upload that list to the accessible deletion mechanism set up under the state’s DELETE Act.
- Minnesota, where lawmakers are considering HF 1567 and its companion SF 3081 that would expand protections currently offered to judges and court staff to public safety officers.
- Pennsylvania HB 1822, which contains many similar provisions to Daniel’s law and would include allowing covered persons, defined as judges, public officials and their families, to utilize authorized agents and assignees to exercise their rights.
FOCUS will continue to monitor changes to Daniel’s Law and other similar legislation in state legislatures across the country.
by Austin Young 2/16/26
