Provide that there is a limited executive privilege to the public records act
HB 271 revises laws concerning executive exemptions to public records requests, aiming to replace a common law privilege with a statutory framework. It allows the Governor to assert a limited executive exemption for specific information only when their individual privacy interest clearly outweighs the merits of public disclosure, requiring the exemption to be narrowly tailored. The bill defines "confidential information" restrictively and sets a maximum duration of 60 days for an exemption to last. Additionally, it requires the award of costs and reasonable attorney fees to a prevailing party in public records litigation.
Bill status
vetoed
4 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Jan 2025
Committee Review
Apr 2025
House Passage
May 2025
Senate Passage
May 2025
Vetoed
May 2025
Introduced Jan 21, 2025
Vetoed May 13, 2025
Maddy AI version diff · 7 comparisons
What changed between versions
HB0271_X(2).pdf
→
HB0271_X(3).pdf
·
4 edits
MODERATE
This bill narrows the Governor's ability to withhold public records by removing the 'merits of public disclosure' balancing test, requiring privacy interests to clearly outweigh public interest. It adds a strict 60-day expiration limit for exemptions and expands the definition of 'constitutional officers' to include the Secretary of State, Superintendent of Public Instruction, and Auditor.
Scope change
The scope of executive privilege is reduced by eliminating the discretionary balancing test and adding a hard time limit, while the scope of protected officials is broadened to include three additional cabinet-level officers.
REQUIREMENT
Removed the legal requirement that the Governor must balance individual privacy against the 'merits of public disclosure' when deciding whether to withhold records.
Modified the criteria for withholding records; the Governor can now only withhold information if their privacy interest 'clearly outweighs' the public interest, rather than just balancing the two.
TIMELINE
Added a mandatory expiration date: executive exemptions must end no later than 60 days after the underlying issue is resolved or if the exemption is upheld in court.
DEFINITION
Expanded the list of 'constitutional officers' subject to these rules to include the Secretary of State, Superintendent of Public Instruction, and Auditor.
Floor votes · Senate Apr 29, 2025 · House Feb 12, 2025
How they voted
27–23
Passed
Total votes 50
Apr 29, 2025
D
Democratic18
72% Yea
R
Republican32
56% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
39
Key actions
8
Committee
6
Amendments
1
May 13, 2025
Vetoed
(H) Vetoed by Governor
lower
May 6, 2025
Upper · Passed
(S) Signed by President
upper
May 2, 2025
Lower · Passed
(H) Signed by Speaker
lower
Apr 29, 2025
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (27-23)
senate
Apr 25, 2025
Upper · Passed
(S) Committee Report - (S) Judiciary
upper
Apr 25, 2025
Upper · Passed
(S) Committee Executive Action - (S) Judiciary
upper
Apr 24, 2025
Amended
(S) Tabled in Committee - (S) Judiciary
upper
Feb 21, 2025
Committee
(S) Referred to Committee - (S) Judiciary
upper
Feb 12, 2025
House · Passed
House Vote: pass (56-44)
house
Jan 31, 2025
Lower · Passed
(H) Committee Report - (H) State Administration
lower
Jan 31, 2025
Lower · Passed
(H) Committee Executive Action - (H) State Administration
lower
Jan 22, 2025
Committee
(H) Referred to Committee - (H) State Administration
lower
Jan 21, 2025
Introduced
(H) Introduced
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Ed Stafman
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about HB 271
Scope: MT
Hi! I can help you understand HB 271. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline