Legislation

This misnomered legislation from the Attorney General would make it a crime to electronically transmit nude or sexually explicit images without the person’s consent, regardless of the sender’s intent.

The ACLU testified that under this legislation, one single act online that is then used by others to justify harassment would be criminal, holding individuals accountable for the actions of others even if they meant no harm with their original post.

In June, the House and Senate approved legislation barring the state from entering into a contract with any business engaged in a boycott against various "foreign states."

In February, the ACLU testified before the House and Senate Judiciary committees in opposition to legislation creating a new crime of obstructing traffic or obstructing a freeway.

As part of a package of computer crimes legislation, the General Assembly considered legislation overhauling the state’s prohibition on cyberstalking and cyberharrassment.

Yet another problematic part of the Attorney General’s package of computer crimes legislation made it a crime to use “the name or persona of another person” to create a web page, send an e-mail or otherwise post on the internet without the person’s consent, including the name of elected officials.

In May, the House overwhelmingly approved legislation to protect the freedom of political speech. The legislation repealed a section of law that is largely regarded as unconstitutional, as it prohibits the distribution of anonymous political literature.

In March and April, the ACLU testified before the Senate and House Judiciary committees, respectively, that the legislation’s overly broad definition of “indecent materials” would encompass award-willing films containing full frontal nudity, art pieces, and even sex education texts.