WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 368

Relating to a prohibition on remotely controlling electronic devices of certain individuals and to the criminal prosecution of that conduct.

89th Legislature (2025) Introduced by Donna Howard and 2 co-sponsors

HB 368 criminalizes unauthorized remote control of electronic devices belonging to specific individuals, creating new criminal penalties for digital access without consent.

Referred to Criminal Justice
#crimes--againstpersons--general(i0170) #criminalprocedure--general(i0208) #electronicequipment(s0554) #family--familyviolence(i0353) #protectiveorders(s0495) #stalking(s0044)
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 368

Legislative bill overview

HB 368 creates criminal penalties for remotely controlling electronic devices belonging to certain individuals without authorization. The bill specifically targets unauthorized remote access and control of devices, establishing it as a criminal offense with specified penalties. The measure has already passed the House and is currently under Criminal Justice Committee review in the Senate.

Why is this important

This bill addresses growing concerns about unauthorized device access, including hacking, stalking, and domestic abuse enabled through remote control of phones, computers, and smart home devices. As technology becomes more integrated into daily life, creating explicit criminal statutes for remote device control helps close gaps in existing cybercrime and harassment laws. The legislation provides clearer legal tools for prosecution and protection against digitally-enabled abuse.

Potential points of contention

  • Scope ambiguity: The bill references "certain individuals" but lacks detail on who qualifies for protection—this vagueness could create enforcement challenges or unequal protection
  • Legitimate access exceptions: The bill does not appear to clearly define exceptions for authorized remote access (parental controls, IT support, device manufacturers), potentially criminalizing routine technical services
  • Definitional precision: "Remotely controlling" lacks technical specificity, raising questions about what constitutes illegal control versus permissible monitoring or shared device access

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

Sign in to ask a question.