SB 1587
Prohibits public bodies from disclosing personally identifiable information to a data broker unless the data broker attests that the information will not be sold or transferred to any entity that will use it to enforce federal immigration law.
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
93%
Oppose
7%
- Introduced
- Passed Senate
- Passed House
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill restricts how Oregon public bodies share personal information with data brokers. It requires data brokers to provide a written guarantee that the information won’t be used for federal immigration enforcement. There are exceptions for disclosures required by law or court orders, and for information already available to the public. The bill was enacted due to an emergency declaration.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsors
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of SB 1587 and the Immigrant Justice Package emphasize the importance of protecting families, particularly children, from harm. They advocate for keeping families together through investments in legal representation, healthcare, food access, and state protections against abuse, retaliation, and data misuse. The package aims to safeguard Oregonians' personal information, maintain consumer trust, safety, and civil rights, and prevent further harm through government overreach. By prioritizing family unity, access to essential services, and protection from abuse and data misuse, supporters believe the Immigrant Justice Package can address community-wide fear and devastating family separations, while promoting a unified response to prevent family separations and protect public data from being used by immigration enforcement.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Opponents of SB 1587 express concerns that the legislation may be motivated by personal corruption and could have far-reaching consequences for protected speech and consumer privacy. They argue that the bill imposes an undue burden on free expression without advancing a substantial governmental interest in consumer privacy, and that its broad approach risks weakening Oregon's existing privacy framework. Additionally, some that civil law already addresses the issue at hand and that the proposed legislation is unnecessary, while others express concerns about the bill's potential impact on legal residents, citing a perceived prioritization of illegal immigrants and potential circumvention of federal immigration law.
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.