OKLAHOMA CITY (Jan. 20, 2016) – A bill filed in Oklahoma this week would significantly limit drone surveillance in the state, and also serve to thwart one aspect of the federal surveillance state.Details
CONCORD, N.H. (Dec. 22, 2015) – A bill introduced in the New Hampshire House for the 2016 session would prohibit a federal-local surveillance collaboration that the NSA’s former chief technical director called the “biggest threat since the civil war.”Details
COLUMBUS, Ohio (Dec. 14, 2015) – A bill introduced in the Ohio Senate would restrict the use of drones by state and local law enforcement. The legislation would not only establish important privacy protections at the state level, it would also help thwart the federal surveillance state.Details
BOSTON (Oct. 9, 2015) – A privacy bill that would prohibit collection of electronic data from communication service providers without a warrant in most cases, and that would effectively block an NSA data sharing program, continues to work its way through the Massachusetts legislature.Details
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (Oct. 8, 2015) – Today, California Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law not just one, but two bills putting into place privacy protections among the strongest in the country. The new laws work together to protect privacy from some of the worst spying programs on the state level, and also take on a part of the federal surveillance state.Details
SALEM, Ore. (July 2, 2015) On Tuesday, Oregon Governor Kate Brown signed a bill into law that prohibits law enforcement from obtaining information from electronic devices without a warrant in most cases. The new law will not only protect privacy in Oregon, but will also address a practical effect of federal spying.Details
HELENA, Mont. (Feb. 27, 2015) – Two bills that would work together to stop the state from conducting mass, warrantless surveillance and help block some of the effects of federal spying programs passed the Montana House yesterday.Details
Whenever the NSA slips up and actually tells the truth, it becomes obvious why they are so deceptive: the truth reveals them to be frighteningly cold, callous and malicious.Details
There should be no local police, no county sheriff’s deputies and no state law enforcement officers involved. If states would simply quit cooperating, many of these constitutional violations would not happen. The feds don’t have the resources. They depend on state and local help.Details
A bill has passed through the Texas State Senate that aims to protect the privacy of their residents from the police state by instituting strict limitations on the use of unmanned drones in surveillance by law enforcement.
Dubbed the ‘Texas Privacy Act’, H.B. 912 is an attempt to rein in potential abuses related to the rapidly-developing drone technology that has made its hands into the hands of government at the state and federal levels. The bill was originally authored by Rep. Gooden (R-District 4) and has amassed over 100 co-sponsors since it was introduced Feb. 1, showing vast and bipartisan support for stopping the government’s Orwellian takeover of our skies.
The House passed the bill by a vote of 128-11 on May 10th. (roll call here) And last Friday the Senate passed a slightly amended version of the bill by a vote of 29-1. (roll call here). HB912 will now go back to the State House to either concur on the amendments or form a conference committee to approve a final version acceptable to both the House and Senate. Then it’s off to Governor Perry’s desk for a signature.
The bill states that “a person commits an offense if the person uses or authorizes the use of an unmanned vehicle or aircraft to capture an image without the express consent of the person who owns or lawfully occupies the real property captured in the image.” The offender would be charged with a Class C misdemeanor if they were caught violating this part of the law.
Data gathered by law enforcement illegally ‘may not be used as evidence in any criminal or juvenile proceeding, civil action, or administrative proceeding’ according to the bill and ‘is not subject to discovery, subpoena, or other means of legal compulsion for its release.’ This incentivizes police to not misuse the drone technology unless they wish to risk jeopardizing their entire investigation.Details