Oregon lawmakers have approved a ban on the sale of a person’s precise geolocation, the latest effort by a state to restrict how one’s data is harvested and monetized.
The bill, which achieved final passage Tuesday after unanimous votes in both chambers, also prohibits the sale of minors’ personal data if they are under 16.
The new protections reflect growing concern about data privacy and security, which have been amplified in blue states as the Trump administration ramps up immigration enforcement and Republican-led states place restrictions on reproductive and transgender care.
“Especially with what’s going on federally, the harms of location data being commercially available are pretty clear to people,” said Matt Schwartz, a policy analyst at Consumer Reports who focuses on consumer privacy.
Schwartz urged Gov. Tina Kotek (D) to sign the bill “so that Oregon can set an example for other states to follow.”
Oregon is one of 19 states with comprehensive consumer data privacy laws. Most were passed in the past two years and focus on giving consumers a set of rights related to their data, while placing obligations on companies that collect data.
Maryland lawmakers went further last year, imposing strict data collection requirements on companies — an effort known as data minimization. They also barred the sale of sensitive personal data, including precise geolocation data, which can locate a person within a radius of 1,750 feet — as does the Oregon bill. Other states allow the sale of sensitive data if a consumer consents.
The pace of comprehensive privacy laws being passed slowed this year. But the current political climate has galvanized some Democrats to seek greater privacy protections for sensitive data.
Read more: Momentum slows for state privacy laws
Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) signed an immigrant rights bill last week that adds “precise geolocation data” to Colorado’s definition of sensitive data. Massachusetts lawmakers are advancing a bill that would ban on the sale of location data as part of an effort to protect LGBTQ rights and access to abortion care.
A California bill the Assembly Appropriations Committee advanced last week would bar “geofencing” around health care facilities and prohibit the collection of location data from individuals visiting a family planning center — similar to elements in Washington State’s 2023 My Health My Data Act.
Not all efforts have been successful. A Consumer Reports-sponsored California bill to ban the collection and processing of location data failed to make it out of the Assembly Appropriations Committee last week. A similar bill in Virginia also died this year. The clock is running out for location privacy legislation introduced in both the Illinois House and Senate this year.
An earlier version of Oregon’s bill included a data minimization standard similar to Maryland’s that was later dropped as the measure was narrowed and renumbered. In the process, House Speaker Julie Fahey (D) joined Rep. Willy Chotzen (D) as a chief sponsor.
After the Oregon Senate passed the bill last week, Chotzen said in a statement that “Oregonians deserve the right to move through the world without being tracked and commodified.”
A coalition of digital advertising groups opposed the legislation. In a letter last month to Oregon lawmakers, the coalition, which includes the Association of National Advertisers, said the ban on the sale of location data would hamper advertisers’ ability to “reach consumers with relevant content and ads” and hurt small- and medium-sized businesses and national brands.
“We and our members strongly support meaningful privacy protections for consumers,” the groups wrote. “We believe, however, that [the bill’s] ban on location data sales will remove choices from Oregon consumers, impede businesses from contacting Oregonians with relevant advertising messages, and will hinder the provision of emergency alerts and fraud prevention services.”
Schwartz of Consumer Reports pushed back on the criticism, saying companies will still be able to collect more generalized location data about consumers.
“It would prevent some of the especially creepy and invasive targeting,” he said.