WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 2299

An Act amending Titles 18 (Crimes and Offenses) and 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, in wiretapping and electronic surveillance, further providing for definitions; and, in recordings by law enforcement officers, further providing for definitions.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Ryan Bizzarro and 14 co-sponsors

HB 2299 refines Pennsylvania's definitions governing law enforcement wiretapping, electronic surveillance, and officer recordings, affecting police authority and privacy protections.

First consideration
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2299

Legislative bill overview

HB 2299 amends Pennsylvania's wiretapping and electronic surveillance laws, as well as provisions governing law enforcement recordings. The bill updates definitions in both Title 18 (criminal law) and Title 42 (judicial procedure) to clarify the scope and application of these surveillance and recording requirements.

Why is this important

These definitions form the legal foundation for how law enforcement can conduct electronic surveillance and record interactions with the public. Changes to these definitions can significantly affect police authority, privacy protections for citizens, and admissibility of evidence in criminal cases. Given current national debate over surveillance powers and accountability, such updates shape both law enforcement capabilities and individual privacy rights.

Potential points of contention

  • Scope of surveillance authority: Depending on how definitions are refined, the bill could either expand or restrict when law enforcement can conduct wiretaps and electronic surveillance, creating tension between public safety advocates and privacy rights groups.
  • Recording consent requirements: Changes to recording definitions may affect whether officers need subject consent to record interactions, influencing transparency and accountability mechanisms while potentially impacting officer safety concerns.
  • Evidentiary standards: Definitional changes could alter what recordings are admissible in court, potentially affecting prosecution strategies, defense capabilities, and case outcomes across the criminal justice system.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.