ASSEMBLY APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE

STATEMENT TO

ASSEMBLY, No. 3561

STATE OF NEW JERSEY

DATED:  JANUARY 8, 2026

      The Assembly Appropriations Committee reports favorably Assembly Bill No. 3561.

      As reported, this bill establishes the crime of doxxing.

      Under the bill, doxxing occurs if a person, with the purpose to subject another person or a close relation of that person to unlawful force, violence, stalking, physical restraint, mental anguish, or to cause a person to reasonably fear for their own safety or that of another, knowingly discloses personal identifying information without the person’s consent via an electronic device or through a social networking site.  A crime is committed under the bill when the disclosure:

      (1) creates a substantial risk of serious bodily injury or physical harm to the person or a close relation of the person;

      (2) creates a substantial risk that the person or a close relation of the person is subjected to stalking; or

      (3)  inflicts mental anguish upon the person or a close relation of the person and places the person or close relation in reasonable fear of physical harm.

      Under the bill, “close relation” is defined as a spouse; domestic partner; partner in a civil union couple; former spouse, former domestic partner; former partner in a civil union; parent, stepparent, grandparent, sibling, stepsibling, child, stepchild, or grandchild, whether related by blood or by law; any person who is a present household member, or who was, within the prior six months, a household member; or any person with a significant personal or professional relationship.

      The crime of doxxing does not occur if the disclosure was made:

      (1)  in good faith to inform any member of the public of conduct by the person that the actor reasonably believed to be unlawful;

      (2)  in good faith to inform law enforcement of conduct committed by the person that the actor reasonably believed to constitute a crime; or

      (3)  while cooperating in an official investigation or prosecution of the crime of cyber-harassment, N.J.S.A.2C:33-4.1.

      The bill also establishes a rebuttable presumption that the actor did not act with the purpose established under the bill if the personal identifying information of another person was disclosed for the primary purpose of:

      (a) publishing, disseminating, or reporting in good faith conduct by an elected public official or law enforcement officer acting in their official capacity that the actor reasonably believes to be unlawful or an abuse of authority; or

      (b)  engaging in lawful and constitutionally protected activity as it pertains to speech, assembly, press, or petition.

      Doxxing is a crime of the fourth degree unless the disclosure results in any serious bodily injury, physical harm, or stalking, then it is a crime of the third degree.  A crime of the fourth degree is punishable by up to 18 months imprisonment, a fine of up to $10,000, or both.  A crime of the third degree is punishable by three to five years imprisonment, a fine of up to $15,000, or both.

FISCAL IMPACT:

      The Office of Legislative Services (OLS) concludes that establishing doxxing as a crime would result in an indeterminate increase in annual State and local expenditures. The OLS lacks sufficient information to quantify the fiscal impact, as it is not possible to know how many individuals will be prosecuted, tried, and sentenced for the crime established by the bill.

      The following State and local agencies would or may incur caseload and expenditure increases: a) the Department of Law and Public Safety would provide guidance and other information related to the prosecution of the cases; b) county prosecutors would have to prosecute additional cases; c) the Judiciary would have to adjudicate additional complaints and monitor additional probationers; d) the Office of the Public Defender would have to represent additional low income criminal defendants; e) the Department of Corrections may have to house and care for more individuals in cases where the sentencing involves incarceration; and f) the State Parole Board may have to supervise the return to society of additional convicts. The OLS notes, however, that a presumption of non-incarceration generally applies to first time offenders of crimes of the third and fourth degree.

      The OLS also notes that the State may receive indeterminate revenue from fines imposed on individuals convicted of this crime; however, the State’s ability to collect fines has historically been limited.