WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 348

RELATING TO THE UNIFORM ANTITRUST PRE-MERGER NOTIFICATION ACT.

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Karl Rhoads and 1 co-sponsor

Strengthens privacy by banning prurient camera surveillance of private areas anywhere, explicitly including residences as private places.

Carried over to 2026 Regular Session.
#uniformantitrustpre-mergernotificationact
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 348

SB 348 — Criminal Law: Visual Surveillance With Prurient Intent — Summary (Maryland, Ch. 152, 2025)

Status: Approved by the Governor (Chapter 152). Introduced Jan. 16, 2025. Approved Apr. 22, 2025. Effective Oct. 1, 2025. Sponsor: Senator Love (et al.).

Purpose / Intent

The act narrows gaps in Maryland’s existing law prohibiting voyeuristic behavior by (1) expanding the statutory definition of places where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, and (2) clarifying the prohibition on nonconsensual camera surveillance of an individual’s private areas regardless of where the individual is located. The goal is to strengthen privacy protections and reduce unlawful visual surveillance conducted with a sexual (prurient) intent.

Key provisions

  • Definition of “private place”

    • Retains that a “private place” is a room where a person can reasonably be expected to fully or partially disrobe and have a reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g., tanning rooms, dressing rooms, bedrooms, restrooms).
    • Explicitly adds “a residence” to the enumerated list of locations considered a private place.
    • Continues to include various public-use locations (office, business, recreation facility, hotel/motel, theater/sports arena, school, bank, family child care home, or other place of public use or accommodation) when they contain such rooms.

  • Definition of “private area”

    • Continues to define “private area” as the naked or undergarment-clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or female breast (portion below the top of the areola).

  • Prohibition on visual surveillance

    • Makes it unlawful for a person, with prurient intent, to conduct or procure another to conduct visual surveillance of:
    • An individual in a private place without that person’s consent; or
    • The private area of an individual by use of a camera without consent under circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe the private area would not be visible to the public — this prohibition applies regardless of the location of the individual (clarifying that camera-recording of private areas is forbidden even if the person is not physically in a listed “private place”).
    • “Visual surveillance” includes deliberate, surreptitious observation by direct sight, mirrors, or cameras, but excludes casual, momentary, or unintentional observation.

  • Exceptions

    • The statute does not apply when the surveillance is without prurient intent and is performed for legitimate purposes: media filming, surveillance to protect property/public safety or prevent crime, or by licensed professionals acting within the scope of their occupation.

  • Penalties and remedies

    • Violation remains a misdemeanor: up to 1 year imprisonment and/or a fine up to $2,500.
    • Victims retain a civil cause of action for actual damages and reasonable attorney’s fees.
    • Other legal or equitable rights are preserved.

Who is affected

  • Potential defendants: persons who secretly observe or record others with sexual intent, including in residences.
  • Victims: individuals whose privacy (including in their homes) is intruded upon; can pursue criminal charges and civil claims.
  • Law enforcement and courts: may see additional prosecutions and related civil litigation; fiscal note projects minimal increases in revenues/expenditures.
  • Media, security professionals, licensed practitioners: remain subject to statutory exceptions if acting without prurient intent and within lawful scope.

Fiscal / procedural notes

  • Fiscal and Policy Note (Maryland Dept. of Legislative Services): estimates potential minimal increases in State and local revenues (from fines) and expenditures (incarceration/court costs) due to expanded application; projected case counts are expected to be small. The Maryland State Commission on Criminal Sentencing Policy reported limited prior convictions under related statutes.
  • Legislative process highlights: introduced Jan. 16, 2025; committee review and amendments; passed both chambers; enacted as Chapter 152 and signed by the Governor Apr. 22, 2025. Effective date: Oct. 1, 2025.

This Act clarifies and strengthens protections against voyeuristic surveillance, notably by ensuring that residences are explicitly covered as “private places” and by clarifying that camera recordings of a person’s private areas are prohibited regardless of where the person is located.

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

Sign in to ask a question.