HB 255 revises Montana's data privacy rules for K-12 student records held by third-party educational technology providers (like apps or cloud services). It requires school districts to include specific privacy protections in contracts with these vendors, such as prohibiting the use of student data for targeted advertising, ensuring data security, and guaranteeing students or parents can access or correct their records. The bill also allows schools to adopt pre-approved model contracts from privacy-focused consortia to simplify compliance. These changes directly affect school districts, educational tech companies, and students whose data is stored or managed through digital platforms.
SB 212, known as the "Right to Compute Act," generally revises laws related to technology. It establishes a fundamental right for individuals to own and use computational resources, asserting that government restrictions on this right must be limited and narrowly tailored to a compelling public interest. The bill also requires deployers of critical artificial intelligence systems that control critical infrastructure facilities to develop a risk management policy. This affects individuals and entities using technology, as well as those responsible for managing AI in essential services.
HB 925, the "Social Media Youth Protection Act," requires social media companies operating in Montana to implement systems that accurately identify minors (with 95% accuracy) and provide parental consent for data privacy settings. It mandates supervisory tools for minor account holders and restricts algorithmically curated services that use engagement-driven features like autoplay or endless scrolling. The bill directly affects social media companies and minors under 18, aiming to reduce excessive use linked to mental health risks by giving parents control over data and content exposure. Key provisions include age-assurance systems, parental consent for data privacy, and penalties for non-compliance, with definitions clarifying terms like "excessive use" and "algorithmically curated services."
HB 650 revises state bonding laws by expanding the definition of "project" to include facilities that provide broadband service. This change allows municipalities and counties to issue bonds to fund projects aimed at delivering broadband services. Specifically, it targets areas where existing broadband speeds are below 100 megabits per second download and 20 megabits per second upload. The bill provides a mechanism for local governments to finance the development of high-speed internet infrastructure in underserved locations.
HB 178 limits the use of artificial intelligence (AI) systems by state and local government entities and officers. The bill prohibits AI use for cognitive behavioral manipulation, unlawful discrimination, deceptive purposes, and most public space surveillance, with specific exceptions. It requires government entities to disclose when AI-produced material is published without human review or when an AI system is used in public interfaces. Additionally, any AI recommendation or decision that could impact a person's rights, duties, or privileges must be reviewed and can be modified or rejected by a trained human in a responsible position.
HB 453 would require the Department of Revenue to establish a program allowing taxpayers to pay state income taxes using cryptocurrency. The department would contract with third-party payment processors to convert cryptocurrency payments into U.S. dollars before the state receives them. A key provision is that using cryptocurrency for state tax payments would not be considered a taxable event for state capital gains tax purposes. This bill would affect taxpayers choosing to pay their state income taxes with cryptocurrency, applying to income tax years beginning after December 31, 2025.
HB 599 revises parental rights concerning data collection and health screenings for children within schools. It establishes that parents can opt-out of school evaluations, surveys, or data collection that does not require personally identifiable information, and must opt-in for those that do. The bill requires schools to notify parents about any physical or mental health screenings or surveys, allowing parents to opt their child out, and to inform parents of any resulting issues. Furthermore, it mandates parental consent for biometric scans, certain audio/video recordings, and specific school trip accommodations. It also prohibits government entity employees from withholding relevant health information from parents.
This bill would prevent social media platforms and other free online spaces (called "digital public squares") from removing users or censoring their content without legal justification. It bans actions like shadowbanning, algorithmic suppression, or restricting content visibility, while allowing platforms to show advertisements. Users could sue platforms for damages if they violate these rules. The law applies specifically to free digital platforms, not paid services, and defines key terms like "deplatforming" as removing users without their request.
SB 163 revises Montana's Genetic Information Privacy Act by expanding its scope to include neurotechnology data. The bill extends privacy protections to information concerning an individual's central or peripheral nervous system activity, such as brain data, collected by various devices. It adds new definitions for neurotechnology and neurotechnology data, and revises provisions related to privacy notices and exceptions. The intent is to safeguard consumers' sensitive neurotechnology data, particularly when collected by non-invasive devices outside of medical settings. This aims to provide similar privacy protections for neurotechnology data as currently exist for genetic data.
SB 282 revises state and local government's ability to obtain and use electronic communications and data from electronic devices. The bill prohibits governmental entities from purchasing various types of electronic data, such as geolocation or sensitive data, without a search warrant or investigative subpoena. It generally requires a search warrant to obtain stored data from an electronic device or to compel disclosure of electronic communications from service providers, though exceptions exist for situations like owner consent or emergencies. Evidence obtained in violation of these provisions would be inadmissible, and collected communications must be deleted after the conclusion of criminal proceedings.
