Summary — S.1238 (Stavri’s Law)
Status & procedural note
- Filed in the Massachusetts Senate (Senate Docket No. 2540 / Senate No. 1238) and presented by Senator Jacob R. Oliveira; bill filed 1/17/2025.
- The bill text replaces Section 36A of Chapter 123 of the Massachusetts General Laws.
- The materials provided include conflicting procedural metadata (multiple referral and hearing entries, and an inconsistent sponsor list). Verify current status on the official Massachusetts legislature website for the latest committee assignments and hearing dates.
Purpose / intent
- Known as “Stavri’s Law,” the bill’s central purpose is to modernize confidentiality rules for court-ordered mental health examinations and commitments so courts can share limited, specific information with criminal justice information systems, federal authorities, licensing authorities, and law enforcement. The stated goal is to balance individual privacy with public safety needs — especially to (1) provide information used in firearm background checks and licensing, and (2) help law enforcement assess suicide risk for persons taken into custody.
Key provisions (what the bill would change)
- Replaces existing Section 36A of chapter 123 (Mass. Gen. Laws) to:
- Maintain general privacy: reports of examinations, commitment petitions, orders, and related papers remain private except at the court’s discretion. Courts must keep a private docket of cases involving persons believed to be mentally ill.
- Preserve inspection rights: subjects of proceedings (and their counsel) and prosecutors in criminal cases may inspect reports and papers in pending proceedings.
- Authorize mandatory transmission of certain court-record information to the Department of Criminal Justice Information Services (DCJIS) under sections 35 and 36C to enable:
1. Dissemination to licensing authorities (as defined under section 121 of chapter 140) when the information is required/allowed by state or federal law for firearm sales or licensing background checks.
2. Transmission to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for inclusion in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) where required/permitted by federal law.
3. Provision to law enforcement agencies with notice that the person was the subject of a Section 35 proceeding, the date(s) of such proceeding(s), and whether an order of commitment issued — specifically to help assess suicide risk in custody.
- Protects voluntary-treatment privacy: courts shall not transmit information solely because a person sought voluntary treatment or was involuntarily hospitalized only for assessment/evaluation.
- Designates transmitted information as non-public records (not subject to public inspection under relevant public-records laws).
- Requires automatic dissemination via CJIS to relevant licensing authorities when the person currently holds a license, card, or permit under sections 122, 122B, 129B, 131, or 131F of chapter 140; dissemination is to occur for each commitment ordered as soon as information is available.
Who is affected
- Individuals subject to Section 35 civil commitment/assessment proceedings (and related Section 36C matters).
- Massachusetts trial courts and clerks responsible for confidentiality and record transmission.
- DCJIS, which will receive and disseminate the information.
- State licensing authorities that issue firearm-related licenses/permits (and potentially other licensing bodies if defined).
- The Federal Bureau of Investigation (NICS) to the extent federal reporting requirements apply.
- Law enforcement agencies receiving notice to assess custody suicide risk.
Potential impacts and issues to watch
- Public-safety benefit: improves background-check data flow for firearm licensing and provides law enforcement actionable information to manage suicide risk in custody.
- Privacy and civil‑liberties concerns: expands mandatory reporting from court records to criminal-justice systems; the bill limits this sharing in some respects (e.g., not for voluntary treatment), but practical effects depend on implementation details and definitions of which proceedings trigger transmission.
- Administrative implications: courts and DCJIS will need procedures and technical means for transmission; licensing authorities may see increased automated notifications and must have processes to act on them consistent with law.
- Legal/operational questions: whether the disclosure triggers license suspension/revocation, appeals or notice rights for affected individuals, and safeguards against improper use of transmitted information.
Related / procedural references
- Replaces SD 2540; related to prior-session bill S.9604 (per provided metadata).
- Presented by Senator Jacob R. Oliveira (Hampden, Hampshire and Worcester).
Recommendation
- Because some metadata provided here conflicts (committee referrals, sponsors, and dates), consult the official Massachusetts Legislature website (malegislature.gov) for the up-to-date bill text, current status, committee assignment, and any amendments or fiscal notes before relying on this summary for decision-making.
