WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SF 325

Peace officer exclusion from discipline for inclusion on the Brady-Giglio lists; Brady-Giglio lists examination task force establishment

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Mark Koran and 1 co-sponsor

Protects peace officers from discipline solely for Brady-Giglio list inclusion and forms a task force to review and guide the use of those lists.

Author added Nelson
#lawenforcement #taskforces
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SF 325

Summary of Senate File 325 (SF 325)

Overview

SF 325 is a Minnesota bill introduced on February 17, 2025, dealing with the treatment of peace officers who are included on Brady-Giglio lists. The bill’s central aim is to shield peace officers from disciplinary action solely due to inclusion on these lists and to establish a task force to examine and assess Brady-Giglio list processes and use. The sponsor is Senator Lofgren (primary).

  • Status: Referred to Judiciary and Public Safety
  • Introduced: February 17, 2025
  • Companion/Related: HF 962

What the bill would do (key provisions)

  • Protection from discipline: The bill would prohibit disciplinary actions against peace officers solely because they are named on Brady-Giglio lists. In other words, inclusion on such lists could not be the sole basis for disciplinary measures.
  • Brady-Giglio lists examination task force: The bill would establish a task force to examine the creation, maintenance, use, and impact of Brady-Giglio lists. The task force would likely evaluate how such lists affect officer accountability, due process, and public safety outcomes.
  • Guidance and policy development: The task force’s work would presumably result in recommendations or policy guidelines regarding when and how Brady-Giglio-listed information should influence personnel decisions, while protecting officers from disciplinary actions based only on listing.
  • Procedural mechanics (implied): The bill may include administrative or legislative framework for appointing task force members, timelines for reporting, and potential alignment with existing prosecutorial or law enforcement procedures. Specifics are not provided in the material available here.

Note: The version content provided with SF 325 in this packet includes text that appears to pertain to county attorney conflicts of interest and outside counsel procedures, rather than Brady-Giglio provisions. The summary above is based on the bill’s title and stated purpose. The conflict-of-interest language is not described as a current or intended provision of SF 325 in the materials given.

Affected parties and impact

  • Peace officers and law enforcement agencies: Officers would be protected from discipline solely due to Brady-Giglio list inclusion, potentially reducing punitive outcomes tied to listing.
  • Prosecutors and district attorneys: May be subject to updated policies governing how Brady-Giglio information is used in case and personnel decisions.
  • State and local governments: May incur administrative costs related to establishing and operating the Brady-Giglio lists examination task force and any resulting policy changes.

Legislative history and timeline

  • Introduced: Feb 17, 2025; referred to Judiciary (and Public Safety concurrently)
  • Subcommittee actions: Feb 20, 2025 – subcommittee meeting; Feb 25, 2025 – subcommittee recommended passage
  • Sponsors: LOFGREN (primary)
  • Related bill: HF 962 (companion)

Next steps

  • Monitor for floor action in the Senate after the subcommittee’s passage recommendation.
  • If passed by the Senate, action would proceed to the House as the companion bill HF 962 progresses.
  • The task force details (membership, reporting deadlines, and implementation steps) will become clearer through amended language and committee hearings.

Bottom line

SF 325 seeks to protect peace officers from discipline based solely on Brady-Giglio list inclusion and to create a formal process (a task force) to review and guide the use of Brady-Giglio lists in Minnesota. The bill is moving through the Judiciary committee with subcommittee endorsement, signaling interest in clarifying policy around credibility listings and their consequences for law enforcement personnel.

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

Sign in to ask a question.