Connecticut House Bill HB06070

Connecticut 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/22/25
• Refer: 1/22/25

Caption

An Act Prohibiting The Disclosure Of The Residential Address Of Federal Prosecutors And Department Of Emergency Services And Public Protection Attorneys Under The Freedom Of Information Act.

Impact

If enacted, HB06070 will specifically alter section 1-217 of the general statutes, adding a provision that prohibits the release of residential addresses for the designated federal officials under the FOIA. The implications mean a significant shift towards prioritizing the safety of individuals in legal and public protection roles, reflecting a growing concern over their vulnerability due to their professional responsibilities. This change is expected to resonate well with current and former federal prosecutors, as well as with law enforcement officials who may face similar risks.

Summary

House Bill HB06070 aims to amend the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to safeguard the residential addresses of federal prosecutors in Connecticut and attorneys working for the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection. The bill intends to prevent the disclosure of these addresses to enhance the personal security of these individuals, who are often involved in sensitive legal proceedings and public safety matters. By ensuring that their home addresses remain confidential, the bill seeks to provide protection against potential reprisals or threats.

Contention

One of the notable points of contention surrounding HB06070 involves the balance between transparency and privacy. Opponents might argue that while the safety of federal employees is paramount, increased privacy protections could lead to a lack of accountability and public oversight. They may contend that FOIA is a critical component of governmental transparency, and alterations that limit the information disclosed could set a precedent, encouraging other public officials to seek similar protections that could complicate public access to government information. The bill's proponents, however, counter that the risk to personal safety justifies these changes to protect those serving in critical public roles.