Relating to the prosecution of certain criminal offenses involving the unlawful disclosure of a residence address or telephone number.
ModeratePlan for compliance
Low Cost
Effective:2025-06-20
Enforcing Agencies
Local Law Enforcement • District Attorneys
01
Compliance Analysis
Key implementation requirements and action items for compliance with this legislation
Implementation Timeline
Effective Date: June 20, 2025 (Immediate effect due to supermajority vote).
Compliance Deadline: June 20, 2025. You must be ready to process removal requests within 48 hours starting on this date.
Agency Rulemaking: None. This is a Penal Code amendment enforced by local prosecutors; no regulatory agency will issue clarifying rules or grace periods.
Immediate Action Plan
Configure Support Systems: Set up automated flagging for keywords (e.g., "remove," "safety," "police," "judge") in support tickets to bypass standard queues.
Establish Suppression Database: Build or configure a "Do Not Repost" list to scrub incoming data loads against prior removal requests.
Update Employee Handbooks: Issue a specific addendum regarding the criminal penalties for misuse of PII via company electronic resources.
Audit Automated Communications: Review automated collections or dispute resolution emails to ensure no PII is exposed in a manner that could be construed as harassment.
Operational Changes Required
Contracts
Employee Acceptable Use Policies (AUP): Update AUPs to explicitly prohibit the transmission of residence addresses or phone numbers via company systems (Slack, Teams, Email) with intent to harass or harm.
Data Vendor Agreements: Revise contracts with data providers to require indemnification if they supply data that was previously subject to a removal demand, causing you to inadvertently "repost" prohibited info.
Hiring/Training
Intake Training: Train Customer Support, Legal Intake, and HR staff to identify "safety/takedown" requests immediately. These cannot sit in a general queue over weekends; they require an expedited escalation path to meet the 48-hour statutory window.
HR Protocols: Ensure HR staff understands that "shaming" or disclosing PII of former employees or applicants via email can now carry criminal weight.
Reporting & Record-Keeping
Takedown Demand Log: Create an immutable log recording the requester's status (public servant), receipt time, and removal time to refute presumptions of intent.
Suppression List: Maintain a "Do Not Repost" database. The law prohibits reposting the data for four years; you must ensure automated database updates do not overwrite manual removals.
Fees & Costs
Insurance Review: No new state fees. However, standard General Liability policies exclude criminal acts. Consult your broker regarding "Cyber" or "Media Liability" riders to cover defense costs if the company is named in a suit arising from an employee's unlawful disclosure.
Strategic Ambiguities & Considerations
Verification of "Public Servant": The statute does not define the verification process for confirming a requester is a "public servant." Businesses risk liability if they delay removal to verify credentials. *Guidance: Treat all safety-based removal requests as valid and execute within 48 hours to mitigate risk.*
Scope of "Electronic Communication": The definition is tied to Penal Code 42.07 and is extremely broad. It is not limited to public posts. An internal email chain or group chat "doxing" an individual could trigger liability if discovered or leaked.
Need Help Understanding Implementation?
Our government affairs experts can walk you through this bill's specific impact on your operations.
Information presented is for general knowledge only and is provided without warranty, express or implied. Consult qualified government affairs professionals and legal counsel before making compliance decisions.
The bill author has informed the committee that Internet crime is a growing problem in today's technology-focused world, with growing threats such as "doxing," whereby a person gathers another individual's personal information and posts it publicly without permission. The 88th Texas Legislature enacted H.B. 611 to make disclosure of a residence address or phone number on a website, with intent to harm, a state offense. The bill author has further informed the committee that doxing, however, can happen not just in postings on a website but also through electronic messaging, which is not addressed in current statute. H.B. 3425 closes this gap in current law, protecting both public servants and private individuals from the unlawful disclosure of a residence address or telephone number through an electronic communication, such as an email, phone call, instant message, or social media platform.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
ANALYSIS
H.B. 3425 amends the Penal Code to do the following:
·expand the conduct that constitutes the offense of obstruction or retaliation to include the disclosure through an electronic communication of the residence address or telephone number of an individual the actor knows is a public servant or a member of a public servant's family or household with the intent to cause harm or a threat of harm to the individual or a member of the individual's family or household in retaliation for or on account of the service or status of the individual as a public servant; and
·expand the conduct that constitutes the offense of unlawful disclosure of the residence address or telephone number of an individual to include the disclosure through an electronic communication the residence address or telephone number of an individual with the intent to cause harm or a threat of harm to the individual or a member of the individual's family or household.
For these purposes, the bill defines "electronic communication" by reference as a transfer of signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, data, or intelligence of any nature transmitted in whole or in part by a wire, radio, electromagnetic, photoelectronic, or photo-optical system.
H.B. 3425 applies only to an offense committed on or after the bill's effective date. An offense committed before that date is governed by the law in effect on the date the offense was committed, and the former law is continued in effect for that purpose. For these purposes, an offense was committed before the bill's effective date if any element of the offense occurred before that date.
Honorable John T. Smithee, Chair, House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence
FROM:
Jerry McGinty, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE:
HB3425 by Capriglione (Relating to the prosecution of certain criminal offenses involving the unlawful disclosure of a residence address or telephone number.), As Introduced
No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
The bill would expand the conduct constituting the offenses of obstruction or retaliation and of the unlawful disclosure of residential addresses or telephone numbers by including the disclosure of certain information through an electronic communication with the intent to cause harm or a threat of harm to certain people.
It is assumed that any fiscal impact and any impact on state correctional populations or on the demand for state correctional resources would not be significant.
Local Government Impact
It is assumed that any fiscal impact to units of local government associated with enforcement, prosecution, supervision, or confinement would not be significant.
Source Agencies:
212 Office of Court Administration, Texas Judicial Council
LBB Staff:
JMc, MGol, AMr, QH
Related Legislation
Explore more bills from this author and on related topics
HB3425 immediately expands criminal liability for "doxing" beyond public websites to include any electronic communication (email, text, internal messaging) containing residence addresses or phone numbers with intent to harm. This creates significant operational risk for all businesses handling PII, particularly regarding data removal requests from public servants, which now trigger a strict 48-hour statutory deadline to avoid a presumption of criminal intent. Implementation Timeline Effective Date: June 20, 2025 (Immediate effect due to supermajority vote).
Q
Who authored HB3425?
HB3425 was authored by Texas Representative Giovanni Capriglione during the Regular Session.
Q
When was HB3425 signed into law?
HB3425 was signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott on June 20, 2025.
Q
Which agencies enforce HB3425?
HB3425 is enforced by Local Law Enforcement and District Attorneys.
Q
How urgent is compliance with HB3425?
The compliance urgency for HB3425 is rated as "moderate". Businesses and organizations should review the requirements and timeline to ensure timely compliance.
Q
What is the cost impact of HB3425?
The cost impact of HB3425 is estimated as "low". This may vary based on industry and implementation requirements.
Q
What topics does HB3425 address?
HB3425 addresses topics including crimes, crimes--miscellaneous, criminal procedure, criminal procedure--general and email & electronic communications.
Legislative data provided by LegiScanLast updated: November 25, 2025
Need Strategic Guidance on This Bill?
Need help with Government Relations, Lobbying, or compliance? JD Key Consulting has the expertise you're looking for.
