How Daniel's Law spread from 1 state in 2021 to 14 jurisdictions in 2026
Daniel's Law lets covered first responders force data brokers to remove their home address. New Jersey passed it in 2021. Thirteen other jurisdictions have followed. The coverage varies wildly.
What's happening
In July 2020, the son of federal Judge Esther Salas was murdered at her front door by a gunman who'd found her home address through a private investigator. The PI pulled the address from public sources, sourced largely through data brokers.
Eighteen months later, New Jersey passed Daniel's Law, named for the judge's son. The law gave covered judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement officers the right to force a data broker to remove their home address within 10 business days of a request. Failure to comply meant $1,000 per violation, plus punitive damages, plus attorney fees. The law also created criminal liability for willful refusal.
That was 2021. Since then, 13 more jurisdictions have passed Daniel's Law-style statutes. The federal version covers federal judges. Most state versions cover only judges. New Jersey, Florida, and Nebraska cover the broadest set of personnel.
The spread is the largest single legislative trend in first-responder privacy this decade. It also remains uneven. A judge in NJ has a workable broker-removal tool. A patrol officer in Wyoming has nothing comparable.
Why it matters for first responders
Three things.
First, where you live and whether you qualify determine what tools you have. A covered person in NJ can force broker compliance under Daniel's Law. FL and NE only let officers withhold their address from county records, not broker listings. Officers elsewhere have the broker's voluntary opt-out process, which works most of the time but isn't legally binding.
Second, the laws are not interchangeable. New Jersey's version covers cops, judges, prosecutors, child-protective investigators, and immediate family. Maryland's version covers only judges. The same officer who has rights in one state has none in another.
Third, the legal landscape is still moving. New states keep passing versions. West Virginia's version was struck down in 2025 (more on that below). Litigation under existing versions is producing rulings on what the laws actually require. The picture in two years will look different from today.
Where this stands as of April 2026
State-by-state timeline of Daniel's Law-style broker-removal statutes:
| Year | Jurisdiction | Statute | Who's covered |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | New Jersey | NJSA 47:1B (P.L. 2021 c.371) | Judges, LEOs, prosecutors, child protective investigators, families |
| 2021 | West Virginia | WV Daniel's Law | Judges (struck down 2025) |
| 2022 | Federal | Daniel Anderl Act (Pub. L. 117-263) | Federal judges and immediate families |
| 2022 | Nebraska | Neb. Rev. Stat. 23-3211 | Judges, LEOs, NE National Guard |
| 2023 | Delaware | Del. Stat. tit. 10 1921-24 | State judicial officers and families |
| 2023 | Missouri | Mo. Rev. Stat. 476.1300(4) | Active/former/retired judges, prosecuting/circuit attorneys |
| 2024 | Florida | Fla. Stat. 119.071 | Judges, LEOs, court staff, firefighters, prosecutors, public defenders, certain state agency personnel, families |
| 2024 | Georgia | Ga. Code Ann. 15-5-110 to 15-5-112 | State, county, municipal, federal judges, spouses |
| 2024 | Hawaii | Haw. Rev. Stat. 92H | Governor, lt. governor, legislators, judges, election employees, others, families |
| 2024 | Maryland | Md. Code Cts. & Jud. Proc. 3-2301 | Current/retired state and federal judges, magistrates, court commissioners, families |
| 2024 | New York | N.Y. Jud. Law 859 | Active/former judges and immediate families |
| 2024 | Oklahoma | Okla. Stat. 3012 | State, municipal, county, tribal, federal judges, spouses/children/parents in same household |
| 2025 | Minnesota | Minn. Stat. 13.991 | Active/senior/retired judges, MN Supreme Court justices, judicial branch employees, judicial referees |
| 2025 | Wisconsin | Wis. Stat. 757.07 | Current/former state appellate, circuit, municipal judges, court commissioners, families |
That's 14 jurisdictions if you count the federal Anderl Act. About a dozen more states have proposals pending or partial coverage that doesn't quite hit the Daniel's Law threshold.
Where it's broadest
New Jersey, Florida, and Nebraska. Each covers law enforcement officers and at least some first-responder categories beyond judges. New Jersey covers the most personnel categories overall and was first, so it has the deepest case law. Florida's 2024 amendment added court staff, firefighters, and public defenders, making it the second-broadest after NJ. Nebraska covers judges, LEOs, and National Guard members.
If you're a cop in any of those three states, you have a real broker-removal tool with statutory damages.
Where it's narrowest
Delaware, Maryland, Missouri, New York, and Wisconsin. Each covers only judicial officers. A patrol officer in those states gets nothing from these laws. The state-level address-confidentiality programs (ACPs), public-records exemptions, and DMV elections are what officers in those states rely on. See our protections breakdown for which mechanisms work where.
Where it was struck down
West Virginia. The original WV Daniel's Law passed in 2021. In August 2025, the federal district court for the Northern District of West Virginia held the statute facially unconstitutional in Jackson v. Whitepages. The court's reasoning: the statute imposed liability on brokers without requiring the covered person to give the broker notice and an opportunity to remove the data first. That, plus the lack of a knowledge requirement, meant the law wasn't narrowly tailored. The court struck it under the First Amendment.
The WV legislature is expected to amend and re-pass the statute with notice provisions. The other states' versions all include notice mechanisms (10 business days in NJ; varies elsewhere) and have not faced the same constitutional challenge.
What to watch
Several things are likely to move in the next 12 to 24 months.
- More states pass versions. Pennsylvania, Illinois, Massachusetts, and Washington all have proposals at various stages. Illinois already has a Judicial Privacy Act covering judges. The Pennsylvania bill would be one of the broadest if it passes.
- The NJ Supreme Court ruling on scope. The court heard argument in March 2026 on questions including assignability of claims, what counts as a "data broker," and the standard for willful violation. The ruling will set the floor for how aggressive plaintiffs can be in NJ federal court, where 37+ Daniel's Law actions are consolidated under Atlas Data Privacy Corp. v. multiple defendants.
- Industry-side lobbying. Data brokers are pushing for federal preemption that would override state Daniel's Law statutes. So far, no federal preemption bill has gained traction, but the broker trade associations are well-funded.
- Expansion of covered personnel. The trend is toward broader coverage over time. Florida's 2024 amendment is the model. Expect 2026 and 2027 amendments in NJ, NE, and others to add categories like firefighters, EMS, and prosecutors-emeritus.
- Litigation under the federal Anderl Act. As of April 2024, 69% of active federal judges were enrolled. DeleteMe (the AOUSC's contracted vendor) had redacted 4.22 million pieces of PII. The first significant private enforcement action under the Anderl Act has not yet hit the federal reporter, but it's coming.
For first responders, the practical upshot: if you live in a state with a Daniel's Law-style statute that covers your role, use it. We file Daniel's Law demands for NJ-covered officers and operate alongside the Lieu Act AOUSC pipeline for federal judges. If you live in a state without one, the broker-removal-law mechanism comparison shows what's available where.