OPPOSE: Under current law, penalties for harassment are determined by the alleged actions of the defendant. However, HB 102 would depart from this legal framework by enhancing the penalty from a summary offense to a third-degree misdemeanor based on who the victim is, instead of punishing people based on the extent, content, duration, or severity of harassment, regardless of the target.

SUPPORT: HB 1042 would establish the Earned Vocational Training and Education Credit to allow people incarcerated in state facilities to earn vocational and educational credits against their minimum sentence. These credits would count towards reducing their sentence—10-180 days, depending on the program—making them eligible for parole or short sentence parole earlier than they would otherwise be.

SUPPORT: HB 1140 would require insurance companies to cover all contraceptive drugs, devices, and other products and services at no cost to the consumer, ensuring that no one loses access to contraception because of their income—and guarantees it for those who need, want, and deserve it.

SUPPORT: HB 1247 would take an important step toward preventing wrongful convictions by prohibiting law enforcement from using deception during custodial interrogations of people with intellectual disabilities or autism, and by creating a presumption against the admissibility of confessions obtained under those circumstances. Individuals with these disabilities are particularly vulnerable to coercion and suggestion, making them more likely to provide false or unreliable statements.

SUPPORT: HB 1311 would prohibit the use of the “LGBTQ+ panic” defense in Pennsylvania, preventing defendants from justifying or reducing criminal liability based on a victim’s sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. It closes a legal loophole to ensure equal protection and accountability, particularly in cases involving violence against LGBTQ+ individuals.

SUPPORT: If a person seeks to change their name in order to affirm their gender identity, HB 1315 would allow the person to request that the court waive the requirement to publish a notification of their intended name change and then seal the name change file.

SUPPORT: Costs, fees, and fines imposed on juveniles undermine public safety, harm youth and families, and create economic and racial disparities. HB 1385 would eliminate juvenile justice system fees and fines, cap restitution costs, and eliminate juvenile court referral for contempt on nonpayment of a summary offense fine.

SUPPORT: HB 1396 is an omnibus reform bill that would (1) expand voting access (e.g., machine-based early voting, standardized ballot drop box requirements, pre-registration for 16- and 17-year olds); (2) modernize and secure our elections (e.g., electronic poll books, recount reform); and (3) address administrative challenges through practical improvements to mail ballot procedures.

OPPOSE: HB 1416 would create a new criminal offense, with five suboffenses, to punish harm or attempted harm to public transit operators. Each of these offenses are already criminalized under current law and as such, are duplicative and unnecessary.

SUPPORT: HB 1492 would prohibit landlords from considering drug distribution convictions older than seven years and to require individualized assessments that consider the unique circumstances of such convictions. By taking a more nuanced approach to drug distribution convictions, landlords will still be able to maintain the safety of their tenants while giving individuals with less severe drug distribution convictions a chance to have safe and stable housing.

SUPPORT: HB 150 would allow incarcerated people to petition for medical release when they have a substantially diminished ability to function in a correctional facility due to a terminal illness, a chronic and debilitating physical or medical condition or disease, a serious functional or cognitive impairment or deteriorating physical or mental health due to the aging process.

SUPPORT: HB 1550 would allow older incarcerated people to be released after completing a substantial portion of their sentence. Research shows that people age out of crime, pose significantly lower risk to public safety, and often face health challenges that are better managed in the community with their families. By creating a meaningful opportunity for parole review, this bill promotes fairness, responsibility, and compassion while maintaining accountability and public safety.

SUPPORT: HB 1604 would require that all law enforcement officers in an agency in a county of the second class A undergo and complete mandatory in-service firearms training courses at least four times each year. undergo real-world simulation training at least twice per year to better prepare them for on-duty confrontations. Documentation of all trainings would be required, with officers who fail to complete the training requirements placed on administrative leave until the requirements are met.

SUPPORT: HB 1613 would ensure children are given an opportunity to consult with an attorney prior to a custodial interrogation. Through decades of research we know that children are inherently different from adults in their behavior, mental and emotional maturity, decision-making skills, and ability to use critical reasoning. We also know the dangers associated with coercive interrogation practices, which makes the need for this common-sense reform all the more urgent.

SUPPORT: HB 1640 would protect healthcare records related to reproductive services from disclosure in Pennsylvania civil and criminal actions/investigations.

SUPPORT: HB 1643 would prohibit Pennsylvania courts from enforcing other states' judgments in cases involving the provision of reproductive healthcare services.

SUPPORT: After a conviction for first-degree murder, the jury decides whether to impose a life sentence or the death penalty. Juries consider factors that could make them more or less inclined to impose the death penalty. HB 166 would require that the state prove—beyond a reasonable doubt—that the aggravating circumstances of a case outweigh any mitigating factors before someone can be sentenced to death, a higher burden of proof than the current requirement of a preponderance of the evidence.

SUPPORT: HB 1800 would update the definition of "marriage" to reflect the ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges that recognized the right of same-sex couples to marry. Specifically, the bill removes gendered references to man and woman in the definition of "marriage" in PA statute.

OPPOSE: HB 1822 would allow certain elected officials and their family members and close associates to demand that data brokers permanently stop disclosing their personal information. While intended to enhance safety and reduce harassment, HB 1822 raises significant civil liberties and constitutional concerns. It threatens freedom of speech and press, undermines transparency, and could unintentionally weaken democratic accountability.

SUPPORT: HB 1902 would provide law enforcement with the training necessary to properly investigate, identify, and prevent hate-based intimidation crimes.

SUPPORT: HB 1905 does not create a new or more punitive hate crimes offense. Instead, it modernizes and clarifies existing law to ensure it more accurately reflects all federally recognized protected classes. Most critically, the bill makes explicit that nothing may be construed to prohibit, limit, or punish the free exercise of constitutionally protected rights, ensuring that enforcement remains properly focused on unlawful conduct without infringing on free speech or religious expression.

OPPOSE: HB 1908 would increase mandatory minimum fines and the possibility of up to two years’ imprisonment for repeated violations of protection from abuse orders. The bill would impose severe penalties for what may be non-violent or technical violations of protective orders (for example, inadvertent contact, miscommunication, or minor violations). Applying such a sanction scheme risks punishments that are disproportionate to the underlying conduct and the risk posed.

OPPOSE: HB 1909 would replace nuanced, individualized sentencing with a one-size-fits-all penalty enhancement. It introduces mandatory minimum-style consequences under the guise of grading enhancements and would disrupt established sentencing conventions, threaten to swell the incarcerated population, place added strain on the public defense system, and inject constitutional and practical problems where none currently exist.

OPPOSE: HB 1934 would actually make it harder for people to obtain information in lawsuits against the Commonwealth. The proposed changes would create confusion, inconsistency, and more red tape. Each agency would have to develop its own procedures for handling discovery, leading to delays and inefficiencies that make it harder for Pennsylvanians to hold the government accountable.

OPPOSE: HB 1935 would create a sentencing enhancement for individuals convicted of making terroristic threats against a school or institution of higher education. Current law already classifies such conduct as a felony of the third degree when it causes an evacuation, lockdown, or disruption from normal operations. This bill is unnecessary and counterproductive. Adding a new sentencing enhancement will only increase incarceration rates without adding deterrent value or improving public safety.

SUPPORT: HB 1944 would amend PA's underage drinking medical amnesty policy to prohibit a person from being charged or prosecuted for recklessly endangering another person so long as they call for help, believe someone is in need of immediate medical attention, comply and cooperate with first responders, and stay with the person in crisis until first responders arrive.

SUPPORT: HB 1945 would amend PA's controlled substance medical amnesty policy to prohibit a person from being charged or prosecuted for recklessly endangering another person so long as they call for help, believe someone is in need of immediate medical attention, comply and cooperate with first responders, and stay with the person in crisis until first responders arrive.

SUPPORT: HB 1957 is a proposed PA constitutional amendment that would affirm and protect every Pennsylvanian’s right to privacy with respect to personal, sexual, and reproductive healthcare decisions, including the right to choose or refuse an abortion, the right to choose or refuse contraceptives, and the right to choose or refuse fertility care, all without discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, or relationship status.

SUPPORT: Currently, women seeking an abortion in PA are required to receive mandated counseling and must wait 24-hours before a scheduled procedure. These requirements create unnecessary obstacles and often deter pregnant individuals from accessing abortion care. HB 2005 would remove the medically unnecessary 24-hour waiting period and counseling requirement from current Pennsylvania law.

SUPPORT: HB 2028 would permit individuals experiencing homelessness to conduct life-sustaining activity in public spaces when no reasonable, alternative options for housing are offered or available.

SUPPORT: HB 2146 clarifies Pennsylvania’s Sunshine Act by limiting when public agencies can add items to meeting agendas without 24-hour notice, ensuring that last-minute changes are only allowed under narrow, defined exceptions. It restores the intent of the law by preventing agencies from broadly bypassing transparency requirements and ensuring the public has a meaningful opportunity to stay informed.

NEUTRAL

SUPPORT: HB 2356 would take a meaningful step toward fairness and second changes for older individuals who have remained arrest-free for a decade and deserve the opportunity to move forward in their lives without unnecessary barriers to employment, housing and stability—the very things that ensure economic and social stability. This commonsense change supports both dignity and community well-being without compromising public safety.

SUPPORT: PennDOT currently requires an applicant for REAL ID to provide an original Social Security card, but does not provide any other document options to verify a person's Social Security number. Pennsylvania is the only state that does not provide residents with alternative SSN verification options. HB 238 would require PennDOT to accept additional documentation permitted under the federal REAL ID Act of 2005 to verify an applicant’s Social Security number when applying for REAL ID.

OPPOSE: Regrettably, the ACLU-PA opposes HB 2443 PN 3253. We share the goal of ensuring that children who have been harmed receive meaningful support and resources. But this bill relies on steep, mandatory fees imposed on people in the justice system—including those who are indigent and those in diversion programs, which already carry costs that can create barriers to successful completion.

SUPPORT: HB 282 would authorize the PA Department of Corrections to establish a medical assistance reentry program for incarcerated individuals who are scheduled to be released and returning to their community. This would ensure a continuity of care, so that access to medication, substance use disorder treatment, and case management services are not disrupted.

NEUTRAL: HB 300 would amend the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act (PHRA) to add explicit, statutory protections from discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. The ACLU-PA is neutral on this version of the bill because it includes unnecessary religious exemption language.

NEUTRAL: ACLU-PA moved to neutral on the bill because it was amended to remove the additional $2 surcharge on every traffic offense, and instead required the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee to conduct a performance audit of the Access to Justice Account with the purpose of determining other mechanisms for funding civil legal aid services.

OPPOSE: HB 374 would dramatically expand the scope of PA’s campaign finance laws, forcing disclosure of nonprofit organizations’ donors and supporters, even when those individuals are not engaged in electoral activity. HB 374 would erode the long-standing privacy protections that allow Pennsylvanians to give to charitable organizations without fear of retaliation or intimidation. Transparency should apply to government actions, not to private citizens exercising their First Amendment rights.

SUPPORT: By requiring the recording of custodial interrogations, HB 413 would ensure that statements admitted in court are reliable, protects against coercion and wrongful convictions, and reduces costly disputes over contested evidence. These protections not only safeguard the rights of the accused but also enhance the credibility of law enforcement and promote public confidence in the justice system.

SUPPORT: HB 439, known as the CROWN Act, would amend the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act to expand the definition of “race” to include traits associated with race, including hair texture and protective hairstyles. HB 439 would prohibit racial discrimination of hair texture and protective hairstyles historically associated with race without infringing on an employer's right to implement otherwise valid workplace health and safety rules or policies.

SUPPORT: HB 443 would provide a fair, constitutional, and practical response to the Commonwealth v. Lee decision, which struck down mandatory life-without-parole sentences for second-degree (felony) murder. The bill replaces an extreme, one-size-fits-all punishment with proportionate sentencing ranges and restores judicial discretion, ensuring that sentences better reflect an individual’s role and culpability in cases where there was no intent to kill.

SUPPORT: HB 458 would allow incarcerated veterans diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or traumatic brain injury (TBI) after imprisonment to apply to the court for post-conviction relief, enabling them to present their diagnosis of a mental health disability sustained during or as a result of active duty or training for active duty as a mitigating factor in the crime for which they were charged.

SUPPORT: Currently, PA state law protects journalists from having to reveal the identity of any confidential sources, but there are other pieces of information that journalists use in their jobs that deserve such protections. HB 490 would extend Pennsylvania’s media shield law to cover all records, information, and documents created or acquired by journalists in their professional duties.

NEUTRAL: HB 632 would update PA's Crimes Code to eliminate enhanced criminal penalties based solely on a person’s HIV status, particularly by removing the felony charge for prostitution, which otherwise is a misdemeanor offense. This aligns that state law with current scientific understanding and public health guidance and reduces the stigma long associated with HIV.

SUPPORT: HB 670 replicates current federal law under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, which prohibits physically obstructing access to reproductive health care clinics. If enacted in PA, the bill would protect the fundamental right to access health services without infringing on protected free speech.

NEUTRAL

SUPPORT: HB 728 would reduce the barriers people experience when transitioning out of incarceration. We should consider all the ways to make re-entry successful for more returning residents. Providing people documentation needed to secure a job, housing and services will be a great improvement.

NEUTRAL: HB 771 would require voters to show identification at every election. The bill not only mirrors the current list of acceptable photo and non-photo forms of identification required for first-time voters, it expands it. And if a voter forgets to bring identification with them to the polls, they have two options to still cast their ballot in person.

OPPOSE: While we appreciate the attempts to address the proliferation of straw purchases and illegal firearm trafficking, the ACLU-PA must oppose HB 837 as it is facially unconstitutional. In the 9th circuit, a similar California law that limited most members of the public to acquiring one firearm in any 30-day period was struck down. The court found the law facially violated the Second Amendment and was not comparable to historical restrictions on gun acquisition.

SUPPORT: Repealing the death penalty would eliminate the most extreme power the government can exercise—the power to take a life—and it has been applied in ways that depend on race, wealth, and geography, not just the facts of a case. A punishment so irreversible, administered so unevenly, cannot be reconciled with a system premised on equal justice under the law and only serves to undermine confidence in the fairness and legitimacy of our criminal legal system.

OPPOSE: Although touted as a way to penalize infant trafficking, HB 910 would amend Title 18 § 4305, which was intentionally designed as a narrow offense to address the commercialization of infants—such as informal, transactional transfers outside the lawful adoption system—not the coercive, exploitative conduct that defines human trafficking. Elevating this offense to a felony blurs that distinction and risks collapsing two separate legal frameworks that were meant to address different harms.

OPPOSE: HB 956 would add municipal workers as the fortieth category to the list of officers or employees against whom simple assault would automatically be charged as a second-degree felony aggravated assault. HB 956 would mete out greater punishment based not on the intent or severity of the assault, but rather on the employment status of the victim.

SUPPORT: Repealing the death penalty would eliminate the most extreme power the government can exercise—the power to take a life—and it has been applied in ways that depend on race, wealth, and geography, not just the facts of a case. A punishment so irreversible, administered so unevenly, cannot be reconciled with a system premised on equal justice under the law and only serves to undermine confidence in the fairness and legitimacy of our criminal legal system.

SUPPORT: HR 165 is a proposed resolution to study pretrial detention practices and detainee populations in the commonwealth. A lack of data and transparency related to pretrial detainee populations is a significant problem in PA. Having any data to better understand the issue can only help us as we advocate for reform, especially in the area of cash bail.

SUPPORT: HR 56 would direct the Joint State Government Commission to conduct a study looking at the current utilization of poll workers, polling places, and voting machines. This study will help to determine the best course of action moving forward and identify legislative and administrative recommendations to minimize the time needed to vote.

SUPPORT: HR 63 would direct the Joint State Government Commission to study diversion programs in Pennsylvania and to make recommendations for improving existing diversion programs as well as establishing new programs.

OPPOSE: SB 10 would create a new, duplicative private school voucher program via scholarships available to parents with children in grades 1-12 who reside within a low achieving school district. Private school vouchers primarily fund religious education with public money, infringing on the religious freedom enshrined in our state constitution. Parents have a right to send their children to religious schools, but they are not entitled to religious education provided at taxpayer expense.

OPPOSE: SB 125 is a proposed constitutional amendment that would give the legislature the constitutional power to pass laws establishing venue in civil cases. The legislature should not have the power to tell the courts how to execute their functions because it dilutes the court's power to act as a check on the legislative and executive branches.

OPPOSE: SB 127 would adopt the IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) working definition of antisemitism. Problematically, the IHRA definition of antisemitism includes criticism of Israel and its policies. Adopting this definition would open the door to targeting a range of protected speech. People may disagree about whether such speech is antisemitic, but that debate is irrelevant to the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from censoring or penalizing political speech.

OPPOSE: SB 1284 would impose a 20-year mandatory minimum sentence for attempt, conspiracy, or solicitation to commit murder of a law enforcement officer—the same sentence for an actual assault of an officer. This would mandate harsher penalties for attempted offenses than for comparable or more serious completed conduct, eliminate judicial discretion, and prevent courts from tailoring sentences to the specific facts and culpability of the individual before them.

OPPOSE: SB 1286 fundamentally alters the purpose of the careless driving statute by attaching severe criminal penalties to conduct that, by definition, lacks intent. Careless driving is designed to address ordinary negligence, not to impose heightened criminal punishment based solely on a tragic outcome. Law enforcement already has a range of more serious charges available when the facts support a higher level of recklessness or intent, making this expansion unnecessary.

OPPOSE: SB 1293 would ban transgender girls and women from participating on athletic teams or in sports from K-college. Trans youth have the right to participate in sports consistent with who they are and denying them that right is blatantly unconstitutional and discriminatory.

OPPOSE: SB 1295 would require English proficiency in the licensing of commercial drivers. PA already has processes in place to verify legal status and ensure drivers meet federal safety and training standards. This bill would unfairly target immigrants and non-English speakers, undermine core civil rights protections without a clear connection to improved public safety, and invite discriminatory enforcement.

OPPOSE: SB 1296 would impose new criminal penalties for commercial drivers who don't meet English comprehension requirements. PA already has processes in place to verify legal status and ensure drivers meet federal safety and training standards. This bill would unfairly target immigrants and non-English speakers, undermine core civil rights protections without a clear connection to improved public safety, and invite discriminatory enforcement.

OPPOSE: SB 210 would create a new criminal offense, with five suboffenses, to punish harm or attempted harm to public transit operators. Each of these offenses are already criminalized under current law and as such, are duplicative and unnecessary.

SUPPORT: SB 306 would establish a useful, transparent mechanism to publicly monitor the status of the procedural steps required for a proposed amendment to the Pennsylvania Constitution during the critical time after the General Assembly passes the amendment in a second consecutive session and before it appears on the ballot for voters to approve or reject.

OPPOSE: SB 326 would permit the automatic scheduling and rescheduling of substances under PA's drug code to align with federal drug schedules. The ACLU-PA would have been neutral on this stand-alone change. However, SB 326 not only fails to provide for a similar process to deschedule or lower the schedule of a substance if/when its federal schedule changes, but it also eliminates the current ability for the PA Secretary of Health to make such an adjustment.

OPPOSE: SB 347 would charge any overdose prevention center with a felony, punishable by up to 20 years in prison and up to $500,000 in fines for an individual or up to $2,000,000 in fines for a clinic. These penalties EXCEED the statutory maximum penalties for a first-degree felony. In other words, the penalty for providing a safe space that can save people from deadly overdoses is *more severe than the punishment for murder.*

SUPPORT: SB 44 would create a process for individuals who have been found to be victims of human trafficking to petition for relief from a license suspension or revocation of their driving privileges when the offense that resulted in their license suspension or revocation was a result of human trafficking.

OPPOSE: SB 471 would require state and county prosecutors to notify ICE if they become aware that a criminal defendant is not a citizen or is otherwise unlawfully in the U.S. ICE already has more than enough tools it needs to target people for immigration enforcement. Furthermore, entangling these two distinct systems by involving ICE during on-going criminal cases could have harmful ripple effects throughout the criminal legal system.

OPPOSE: SB 490 would unconstitutionally prohibit judges from assigning non-monetary bail for defendants based only on their charges. SB 490 would violate (1) constitutional requirements for bail consideration, and (2) constitutional separation of powers, which gives the courts power to decide criminal legal procedures. In addition, if enacted, SB 490 would have little effect on current bail practices. It would, however, exacerbate economic and racial disparities in the criminal legal system.

OPPOSE: SB 65 would increase fines and enhance penalties for repeat violations related to school bus safety. While the intent to protect children is laudable, the evidence shows that increasing penalties will not improve compliance or safety. Current penalties are already severe, including substantial fines and mandatory license suspensions.

OPPOSE: SB 686 would create a new, duplicative offense to punish the destruction of requested public records as a third-degree felony. Tampering with public records or information (18 § 4911) already covers the behavior described in SB 686. As such, SB 686 is unnecessary and clearly duplicative. In addition, the third-degree felony grading, even for a first offense, is excessively punitive.

OPPOSE: SB 716 would allow individuals with an addiction to be involuntarily committed by treating substance use disorder as a mental illness. Imposing civil commitment or court-ordered treatment on people suffering with addiction will likely increase incarceration for failure to comply with court-ordered treatment with a disparate impact on women and people of color. Furthermore, numerous studies show that forcing people into drug treatment involuntarily is not only ineffective but harmful.

OPPOSE: SB 790 would limit the number of right to know requests from repeat—or "vexatious"—requesters. Such a provision would violate requesters' constitutional right to petition the government and to due process. If enacted, SB 790 would permit agencies to pick and choose which Pennsylvanians are entitled to access to public records. If a record is public, then it should be available to all members of the public—without exception.

OPPOSE: SB 9 would ban transgender girls and women from participating on athletic teams or in sports from K-college. Trans youth have the right to participate in sports consistent with who they are and denying them that right is blatantly unconstitutional and discriminatory.

OPPOSE: SB 912 proposes a massive expansion of genetic surveillance—seizing DNA from people who are presumed innocent under the law, turning them into permanent suspects. Authorizing law enforcement to accumulate genetic data from people without a warrant flies in the face of our most foundational constitutional principles, like the presumption of innocence and the rights to privacy and due process.

OPPOSE: SB 92 would impose a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years and a fine of $15,000 (or more) for any person convicted of drug delivery resulting in death if the person had two or more prior convictions, or any person who “received anything of value" in exchange for any controlled or counterfeit controlled substance. Not only would SB 92 result in the imprisonment of people suffering from substance use disorder, it would impose the ineffective blunt instrument of mandatory minimums.

OPPOSE: SB 923 would amend the Right-to-Know Law to exempt volunteer fire and EMS non-government agencies from its requirements. Wholly exempting volunteer fire/EMS companies from the responsibility of reporting on how they use taxpayer dollars undermines public accountability and transparency.

OPPOSE: SB 96 would make *any threat* against a school or educational facility a third-degree felony, punishable by up to 7 years in prison and $15,000 in fines. But current law already punishes threats against a school as a third-degree felony if it resulted in people being "diverted from their normal operations." As such, SB 96 is both needlessly broad and likely redundant.