WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 4000

Suffrage; restore to Jillinda Bateman of Amite County.

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Daryl Porter

HB 4000 narrows body camera rules, limits disclosures to flagged cases, lets officers view footage before reports, and increases penalties for removing cameras.

Died In Committee
#judiciaryb
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 4000

Summary — HB 4000 (2025) — “Suffrage; restore to Jillinda Bateman of Amite County.”

(Note: bill text actually amends Illinois Law Enforcement Officer‑Worn Body Camera Act and related statutes)

Overview / Purpose

HB 4000 (sponsored by Rep. Dennis Tipsword) would revise Illinois law governing officer‑worn body cameras, in‑car cameras, disclosure of recordings under FOIA, and related criminal penalties and grant-reporting requirements. The stated effect is to narrow the applicability of the Body Camera Act, change notice, viewing, retention and disclosure rules for recordings, and create or clarify related criminal penalties and grant reporting provisions.

Key provisions

  • Scope/exemptions:

    • The Body Camera Act would not apply to school resource officers, undercover or covert officers, or officers employed in an administrative capacity — except that undercover/covert officers would be covered when conducting interviews.
    • The term “in uniform” is redefined to mean an officer only when “primarily assigned to respond to law enforcement‑related encounters or activities.”
    • Adds a definition for “no expectation of privacy.”

  • Notice and recording rules:

    • Effective January 1, 2027, officers would NOT be required to provide notice of recording to a person who has a reasonable expectation of privacy at the time of recording.

  • Officer access and reporting:

    • Removes statutory prohibition that prevented officers from viewing body‑camera recordings prior to completing related reports (i.e., officers could view recordings before filing reports).

  • Retention, flagging, and disciplinary use:

    • Modifies the rules governing when flagged recordings must be preserved (exceptions to destruction) and changes when recordings can be used to discipline officers (details in bill text).

  • FOIA / public disclosure:

    • Recordings would be subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act only when a recording has been flagged due to any of: a complaint filing, discharge of a firearm, use of force, an arrest or detention, or when the encounter resulted in death or bodily harm — and only if the subject of the encounter had a reasonable expectation of privacy at the time of recording. (This removes other current FOIA‑access exceptions.)
    • Provides that only the subject of a recording—or the subject’s legal representative—may obtain the portion of a recording containing the subject, and only if the subject or representative provides written authorization to release that video.

  • Grants and reporting:

    • Amends the Law Enforcement Camera Grant Act by removing a requirement that grant recipients include criminal and civil proceedings where cameras were used in required reports.

  • Criminal Code amendments:

    • Adds that a person obstructs justice if, with intent to prevent apprehension or to obstruct prosecution/defense, they knowingly take a body camera or any part of it from a known peace officer. The offense would be either a Class 1 or Class 2 felony (as specified in the bill).

Who would be affected

  • Law enforcement agencies and officers (including school resource officers, undercover/covert, and administrators by exclusion or limited coverage).
  • Individuals recorded by law enforcement (their access to recordings and privacy protections).
  • FOIA requesters, journalists, and civil litigants seeking recordings.
  • Agencies receiving state grants for body/in‑car cameras (reporting obligations).
  • People who interfere with or remove body cameras (new felony exposure).

Potential impacts (policy implications)

  • Reduces the range of situations and actors covered by the Body Camera Act (fewer recordings required/regulated).
  • Narrows public and FOIA access to recordings by limiting disclosure to a small set of “flagged” circumstances and adding the requirement that the subject had a reasonable expectation of privacy.
  • Makes it easier for officers to view footage before preparing reports, which could affect investigative and accountability processes.
  • Restricts who may obtain recorded material (generally the recorded subject or their legal rep with written authorization).
  • Creates stiffer criminal penalties for removal of body‑camera equipment.

Procedural history / Status

  • Introduced in early March 2025 by Rep. Dennis Tipsword (bill text shows 3/4/2025 introduced).
  • Referred to Rules Committee, then to Judiciary B, then to State Affairs.
  • First reading March 4–6, 2025; read first time March 27, 2025.
  • Died in committee (April 3, 2025).

Effective dates / Important timing

  • The specific change eliminating the notice requirement would take effect January 1, 2027 (per the bill synopsis). Other changes would take effect according to the bill’s statutory effective date provisions if enacted.

Note: This summary focuses on the bill’s substantive changes as described in the introduced version. For precise statutory language and to assess interactions with existing law, consult the full bill text and any enacted amendments.

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

Sign in to ask a question.