1An Act to repeal 757.07 (4m) (a); to renumber 757.07 (6); to renumber and
2amend 59.43 (1r); to amend 757.07 (1) (g) 1., 757.07 (1) (i), 757.07 (1) (k),
3757.07 (2) (a), 757.07 (4) (b) 1. a., 757.07 (4) (b) 2., 757.07 (4) (d), 757.07 (4) (e)
41., 757.07 (4m) (b) and 757.07 (5) (b); to create 59.43 (1r) (b) 3., 757.07 (1)
5(am), 757.07 (1) (em), 757.07 (1) (im), 757.07 (2) (c), 757.07 (4) (e) 2. d., 757.07
6(4m) (c) and 757.07 (6) (b) of the statutes; relating to: privacy protections for
7judicial officers.

2023 Wisconsin Act 235, effective April 1, 2025, established certain privacy protections for judicial officers upon submission of a written request. A “written request,” under Act 235, is a written notice signed by a judicial officer or a representative of the judicial officer’s employer requesting a government agency, business, association, or other person to refrain from publicly posting or displaying publicly available content that includes the personal information of the judicial officer or the judicial officer’s immediate family. The bill modifies the definition of a “written request” to include a requirement for notarization. Under the bill, a “written request” means a notarized written notice signed by a judicial officer or a representative of the judicial officer’s employer completed and filed under the procedures established by Act 235 and amended under the bill. The bill adds a requirement that a judicial officer describe with reasonable particularity in a written request the records the judicial officer believes to contain personal information.

Act 235 provides that a written request is valid if the judicial officer sends the request to the director of state courts and the director of state courts has a policy and procedure for filing the requests, or if the judicial officer sends the request directly to a government agency, person, data broker, business, or association. The bill modifies the latter option, specifying that the judicial officer must send the request directly to the designated officer of a government agency. The bill defines a “designated officer” to mean the officer or employee of a government agency, the register of deeds, or a provider of a land records website designated in writing to the director of state courts, or, in the absence of a written designation, the highest ranking officer or employee for any of these entities. The bill also changes a requirement that the director of state courts must, each quarter, provide to the appropriate officer with ultimate supervisory authority for a government agency a list of judicial officers who have submitted a written request for privacy protections to instead require that the director of state courts provide the designated officer for a government agency with such a list.

The bill provides that a home address constitutes personal information as defined in the bill only if it is directly associated with or displayed with the judicial officer’s name. The bill requires a judicial officer to update a written request within 90 days of the date any home address identified in the request ceases to be a home address for any reason. The bill also defines a secondary residence for purposes of the bill to mean a residence for personal use that is not a person’s permanent residence but where a person regularly resides.

The bill modifies the definition of the phrase “publicly post or display” established in Act 235 to expressly exclude direct communications with a judicial officer or any immediate family member of a judicial officer. The bill also adds an exception to the prohibition on a government agency publicly posting or displaying a judicial officer’s personal information subject to protections upon a written request, providing that a government agency may publicly post or display such information if required by law to do so.

The bill also makes several changes to provisions of Act 235 relating to the register of deeds and land records websites, including adding clarification that a land records website does not include a website administered by the register of deeds. The bill adds to the list of exceptions under which the register of deeds may allow third-party access to a document otherwise subject to protection, including providing an exception to allow access by a title insurance company, an authorized agent of a title insurance company, or an attorney licensed to practice in the state.

The bill adds liability protections for government agencies and employees of government agencies, providing that no government agency and no employee of a government agency is generally or personally liable or subject to any liability or accountability by reason of a violation of the privacy protections set forth under Act 235, unless the liability or accountability is the result of intentional or reckless actions. The bill provides that nothing in the privacy protections established under Act 235 and amended in the bill prohibits a government agency from sharing information with other government agencies for any legitimate governmental purpose.

SB169,2,9359.43 (1r) (a) The Except as otherwise required by law, the register of deeds
4shall shield from disclosure and keep confidential documents containing personal
5information covered by a written request of a judicial officer under s. 757.07 (4), if
6the judicial officer specifically identifies the document number of any document to
7be shielded under this subsection. This subsection applies only to electronic images
8of documents specifically identified by a judicial officer as covered by a written
9request under s. 757.07 (4).