WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 6157

Civil rights: public records; regulation of disclosure of certain information; provide for. Creates new act.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Brenda Carter and 7 co-sponsors

HB 6157 aims to curb disclosure of sensitive information in public records to protect civil rights and safety, while preserving access with exemptions and review standards.

bill electronically reproduced 07/03/2026
#civilrights:privacy #civilrights:publicrecords
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 6157

Overview

HB 6157 (Michigan, 2025-2026) seeks to reform how civil rights considerations intersect with public records by regulating the disclosure of certain information. The bill is framed as a civil rights measure aimed at protecting individuals from sensitive disclosures through public records requests, while outlining processes for access to information.

Purpose and intent

  • To regulate the disclosure of specific information in public records in order to protect civil rights and address concerns about privacy, safety, or potential misuse.
  • To clarify the balance between transparency (public access to government records) and protections against harm or discrimination that could arise from broad disclosure.

Key provisions and changes (as described in bill summary)

  • Public records disclosures: The bill introduces restrictions or conditions on disclosing certain categories of information obtained through public records requests. This may include information that could facilitate harassment, discrimination, doxxing, or other civil rights harms.
  • Definition of protected information: The bill defines what constitutes “certain information” subject to regulation. This likely covers personal identifiers, sensitive demographics, or data that could be used to target individuals or groups.
  • Exemptions and narrow tailoring: Provisions may create exemptions from disclosure for specific types of records or contexts (e.g., protective orders, safety concerns, or information relating to private individuals who are not public figures).
  • Assessment and review: It could establish criteria or guidelines for determining when disclosure would infringe civil rights or endanger safety, possibly including a balancing test or objective standards.
  • Enforcement and penalties: The bill may specify enforcement mechanisms for violations, along with penalties or remedies if public agencies improperly disclose protected information.
  • Compliance timelines: Any new disclosure rules would include effective dates, transition periods, or phased implementation requirements for state and local agencies.

Who would be affected

  • Public bodies in Michigan that handle public records requests (state agencies, local government, and possibly law enforcement or judiciary entities).
  • Individuals whose information might be protected under civil rights considerations (e.g., private individuals, activists, or individuals at risk of harassment).
  • Requesters of public records, who may experience changes in what information is accessible and under what conditions.
  • Entities that process or store public records (data contractors, IT systems managing public records).

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Status: Introduced and referred to the Committee on Government Operations (as of the latest action history).
  • Introduction date: July 3, 2026.
  • Reproduction/availability: Bill electronically reproduced as of July 3, 2026.
  • Next steps: Likely committee hearings, potential amendments, and floor votes before a full chamber; subsequent passage to the other legislative chamber (and potential gubernatorial action) would follow usual procedures.

Important notes

  • The precise language of the bill is not provided here, so the above reflects the bill’s stated aim and typical provisions in this policy space. For a complete understanding, the exact text of HB 6157 and any accompanying analyses or fiscal notes should be reviewed.
  • Co-sponsors listed: Brenda Carter, Carrie Rheingans, Donavan McKinney, Reggie Miller, Tonya Phillips, Veronica Paiz, Peter Herzberg, Stephen Wooden. This indicates bipartisan or cross-district sponsorship, signaling potential prioritization in committee consideration.

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

Sign in to ask a question.