WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 398

Wiretapping, Eavesdropping, Surveillance, and Related Offenses; criminal offenses of virtual peeping; establish

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by John Albers and 21 co-sponsors

Georgia bill criminalizes "virtual peeping"—unauthorized electronic surveillance of private spaces—closing gaps in existing wiretapping laws to address modern surveillance technology threats.

Senate Disagreed House Amend or Sub
#crimesandoffenses(criminalcode)
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 398

Legislative bill overview

SB 398 expands Georgia's criminal laws to criminalize "virtual peeping"—the unauthorized use of electronic devices or technology to surveil, observe, or record individuals in private spaces or situations where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy. The bill also strengthens existing wiretapping and eavesdropping statutes to address modern surveillance methods and related offenses.

Why is this important

As surveillance technology becomes increasingly accessible and sophisticated, existing laws written for analog-era crimes struggle to address digital threats like hacking into home cameras, secretly recording through smartphones, or remotely accessing devices to spy on people. This bill aims to close legal gaps and provide clearer criminal penalties for technology-enabled voyeurism and privacy violations that harm victims but may fall outside traditional wiretapping statutes.

Potential points of contention

  • Definition precision: "Virtual peeping" language may be overly broad or vague, potentially capturing legitimate uses of technology or creating unintended consequences for cybersecurity professionals, parents monitoring children, or employers with reasonable monitoring practices
  • First Amendment implications: Clarification needed on how the law applies to journalism, whistleblowing, or recording in contexts where consent and privacy expectations are ambiguous
  • Enforcement and prosecution burden: Law enforcement and prosecutors may lack training or resources to investigate complex digital surveillance cases, and courts may struggle with technical evidence standards

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

Sign in to ask a question.