As technology advances, governments have more tools than ever to collect, analyze, and store information about the public. That reality makes strong privacy protections, and transparency about how the government uses new technologies, more important than ever.
During the 2026 legislative session, Utah lawmakers considered several proposals aimed at updating the state’s privacy framework. Some bills strengthened protections for digital data, while others highlighted the growing debate over government surveillance and transparency.
Here are the most significant privacy bills Libertas Institute tracked this session.
✅ Strengthening Digital Privacy Protections
HB 261 from Rep. Kyle and Sen. Weiler updates Utah’s Electronic Information Privacy Act, which governs how law enforcement can access electronic data such as device location information, stored communications, and other digital records.
The bill clarifies procedures for obtaining electronic information and reinforces the requirement that law enforcement obtain a warrant before accessing most electronic data. It also prevents agencies from circumventing the law by using a third party to obtain information that they would otherwise be prohibited from collecting directly.
Our Take:
While HB 261 does not include all the protections we would prefer, it represents an important improvement after a 2023 court ruling created uncertainty around Utah’s digital privacy framework.
Clarifying that law enforcement must follow the procedures in the Electronic Information Privacy Act, and cannot work around those protections through third parties, helps reinforce the principle that digital data deserves the same constitutional protections as physical property.
✅ Transparency in Surveillance Technology
HB 450 from Rep. Shallenberger and Sen. Cullimore updates Utah’s government data privacy framework by restructuring the Utah Privacy Commission, establishing a data privacy ombudsman, and creating a complaint process for individuals who believe their privacy rights have been violated.
However, the most significant privacy debate surrounding HB 450 involved transparency around government surveillance technology.
Libertas supported adding provisions known as “Truth in Surveillance,” which would have required government agencies to publicly disclose the surveillance technologies they use and give communities a voice in how those tools are deployed.
Those provisions were ultimately removed from the bill after objections from law enforcement.
Our Take:
When governments deploy powerful surveillance tools, the public deserves to know what technologies are being used and how they are being deployed.
Although HB 450 still improves Utah’s privacy oversight structure, the removal of the Truth in Surveillance provisions was a missed opportunity. The good news is that lawmakers agreed to study the issue during the 2026 interim, ensuring the conversation will continue.
✅ Digital Identity with Privacy Guardrails
SB 275 from Sen. Cullimore and Rep. Cutler establishes Utah’s State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program, allowing residents to obtain a secure digital credential that can be used to verify identity or age in certain transactions.
The bill creates a digital identity bill of rights, sets standards for identity verification, and outlines requirements for government agencies and private providers that participate in the program.
Our Take:
Digital identity technology has the potential to make many everyday transactions more convenient and secure. At the same time, it raises legitimate questions about privacy and government oversight.
SB 275 is a step in the right direction so long as the program remains limited to its intended uses and does not become a tool for tracking where and how individuals use their digital credentials.
Maintaining those privacy guardrails will be critical as the system is implemented.
Looking Ahead
The debate over privacy is not going away. As new technologies emerge, governments will continue gaining new capabilities to collect and analyze personal data.
That reality makes transparency and accountability essential. A free society requires not only limits on government power, but also public visibility into how that power is used.
The 2026 legislative session made progress on several fronts, but it also underscored the need for greater transparency when governments deploy surveillance technologies. As lawmakers study these issues during the interim, Utah has an opportunity to lead in developing privacy protections that respect both technological innovation and the principle that government authority ultimately comes from the consent of the governed.
