Laws
Daniel's Law and Police Officer Privacy (2026 Guide)
The short version
Daniel's Law is a New Jersey statute that lets judges, prosecutors, police officers, child protective investigators and the family members living with them order any person or business to stop publishing their home address and unpublished home phone number. The site gets 10 business days after written notice. If it does not comply, the court must award at least $1,000 per violation plus legal fees. The law covers only those two data points, only after notice, and only for the people it names. Everyone else still relies on ordinary opt-outs.
What Daniel's Law is and why it exists
Daniel's Law is New Jersey's rule that a covered public servant can force the removal of their home address and unpublished home phone number from the internet. It was approved on November 20, 2020, four months after the murder that gave it its name, and it now sits at N.J.S.A. 56:8-166.1 with a companion criminal provision.
Daniel Anderl was the 20-year-old son of US District Judge Esther Salas. In July 2020 a former litigant who had built a dossier on the judge, including her home address, arrived at the family's North Brunswick home posing as a delivery driver. He shot and killed Daniel and critically wounded the judge's husband, Mark Anderl. The New Jersey Senate Judiciary Committee described the law as action "directly related to, and intended to honor" Daniel.
The statute says it must be "liberally construed" to let public servants in the justice system "carry out their official duties without fear of personal reprisal." That instruction matters later, because courts have leaned on it when data brokers argued the law should be read narrowly.
Who counts as a covered person
A covered person is an active, formerly active, or retired New Jersey judicial officer, law enforcement officer, or prosecutor, a child protective investigator in the Division of Child Protection and Permanency, and any immediate family member living in the same household as one of them. Retirement does not end the protection, and neither does leaving the job.
The family clause is what makes the law useful in practice, because the person at risk in the Anderl case was not the judge. A spouse, child or parent who shares the home can send their own notice. The statute does add one housekeeping duty: a family member who moves out has 30 days to tell any business they previously notified.
Child protective investigators were added by the July 2023 amendment. Police officers were originally on an 18-month delay from the 2020 signing, which has long since passed. If you are none of these people, the law simply does not reach you, and the sections near the end of this guide cover what you can do instead.
What information it protects, and what it does not
The law protects exactly two things: your home address and your unpublished home telephone number. It does not cover your name, your age, your workplace, your email address, your relatives' names, your property records, or your photo. A people-search profile that drops the address but keeps everything else is, on the face of the statute, compliant.
That gap is why covered persons should not treat a Daniel's Law notice as a full removal. The rest of a listing still comes out through the site's ordinary free opt-out, which every major people-search site offers. Our opt-out guides by broker type walk through those forms one by one.
The word "disclose" is defined broadly. It includes selling, giving, posting, publishing, distributing and advertising the information, so a broker that removes a page from public view but keeps selling the address to other brokers is still disclosing it.
How to use the law: two separate tracks
There are two routes and they do different jobs. The state's Office of Information Privacy runs a portal for government records and websites. For private websites and data brokers, you send a written notice yourself, directly to the business. Neither route triggers the other, so a covered person who wants both has to do both.
Track one: government sites. The Office of Information Privacy, inside the Department of Community Affairs, was created by the January 2022 amendment. Its portal at danielslaw.nj.gov opened on July 12, 2022. You register, link a myNewJersey login, and file a request that has your address redacted from state, county and municipal websites and records. The office says it is safeguarding more than 10,000 covered persons.
Track two: private sites. The notice must say that you are an authorized person under Daniel's Law and must ask the business to stop disclosing the information and remove it from the internet or wherever it is made available. Keep a dated copy and proof of delivery. Since the 2023 amendment you no longer need prior approval from the state office before sending it.
The business then has 10 business days from receipt. Nothing in the law obliges a site that has not been notified, so an old listing is not by itself a violation. Our broker opt-out guides list the contact and removal addresses for each site, which is where the notice should go.
What happens when a site ignores you
If the address is still up after 10 business days, or reappears later, the covered person can sue in Superior Court. The 2023 amendment changed the remedy from something a court "may" award to something it "shall" award, which is the single biggest reason the lawsuits followed.
- Actual damages, with a floor. Not less than liquidated damages of $1,000 for each violation.
- Punitive damages if you prove willful or reckless disregard of the law.
- Reasonable attorney's fees and litigation costs.
- Injunctions and any other equitable relief the court finds appropriate.
Two more features give the law teeth. First, an authorized person can assign the right to sue, in writing, to another person or company, which is how one firm came to hold thousands of claims at once. Second, the companion criminal section covers anyone who, after notice, knowingly posts the protected information with purpose to expose someone to harassment or risk of harm, or in reckless disregard of that risk. A reckless violation is a fourth-degree crime and a purposeful one is a third-degree crime.
The Atlas litigation wave
In February 2024, Atlas Data Privacy Corp. filed more than 130 lawsuits in New Jersey against data brokers accused of ignoring Daniel's Law takedown notices, on behalf of more than 20,000 police officers, state troopers, prosecutors and their families. It is the largest single litigation wave the people-search industry has faced.
The mechanics were simple. Atlas collected assignments from covered persons, sent notices in bulk, waited out the 10 business days, and sued the businesses that had not complied. The defendants included both well-known people-search brands and background-data suppliers most consumers have never heard of. Many of the cases were moved to federal court, where the brokers filed a joint motion arguing the law violated the First Amendment.
For someone who is not a police officer the takeaway is sobering. If serving officers holding a statutory right to removal had to sue in those numbers, an ordinary person filing an ordinary opt-out should expect to verify the result rather than assume it.
Where the courts stand in 2026
Every court to rule so far has kept the law alive, but one question is still open. A federal trial judge, then the state Supreme Court twice, have rejected the brokers' main arguments. The sequence matters because each decision narrowed what the industry could still argue, leaving a single First Amendment question for the federal appeals court.
| Date | Court | What it decided |
|---|---|---|
| November 26, 2024 | US District Court (D.N.J.), Judge Bartle | Denied the brokers' motion to dismiss. Called the law content-based but constitutional: an address is "but a tiny part of the life story of covered persons." |
| June 17, 2025 | New Jersey Supreme Court, Kratovil v. City of New Brunswick | Unanimously upheld the law as applied to a journalist. He could report that a police director lived in Cape May, but not publish the exact address. |
| August 12, 2026 | New Jersey Supreme Court, Atlas v. We Inform | Unanimously answered the Third Circuit: the law "contains no mental state requirement" for actual damages. A broker is liable without proof of negligence. |
| Pending | US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit | Must decide whether liability without fault violates the First Amendment. |
Sources: Atlas Data Privacy Corp. v. We Inform, D.N.J. opinion of November 26, 2024; Kratovil v. City of New Brunswick, A-6-24 (N.J. June 17, 2025); New Jersey Globe reporting on the August 12, 2026 opinion by Justice Fabiana Pierre-Louis.
The August 2026 ruling cuts both ways. Covered persons no longer have to prove a broker was careless, which makes each case easier to win. But the brokers had argued that a strict-liability speech restriction is exactly what the First Amendment forbids, and the state court expressly left that question to the federal appeals court. Until the Third Circuit rules, the $1,000-per-violation remedy stands but is not settled.
Federal judges and the copycat laws
Daniel's Law now has a federal twin and a growing set of state cousins. The Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act passed the US Senate 83 to 11 on December 16, 2022, inside the annual defense bill, and was signed that month. It covers federal judges and their families, bars data brokers from selling their covered information, and requires removal within 72 hours of a written request.
| Law | Who it covers | Removal deadline | Minimum damages |
|---|---|---|---|
| New Jersey Daniel's Law (2020) | NJ judges, prosecutors, police, child protective investigators, household family | 10 business days after notice | $1,000 per violation |
| Federal Daniel Anderl Act (2022) | Federal judges and immediate family | 72 hours after request | None fixed; the US Courts can seek an injunction through the Justice Department |
| Maryland Judge Andrew F. Wilkinson Act (2024) | Maryland judges, magistrates, household family | 72 hours after request | None fixed; actual damages, fees, punitive if willful |
Sources: N.J.S.A. 56:8-166.1 as amended by P.L.2023, c.113; US Courts and the National Conference of Bankruptcy Judges on the federal act; Troutman Pepper Locke on the Maryland act, effective June 1, 2024.
The spread has been fast. A September 2025 review by the screening firm Cisive counted roughly 20 new laws or amendments modeled on New Jersey's since January 2025, in states including Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Texas, Virginia and Wisconsin. Some, such as South Carolina's law taking effect January 1, 2026, reach only government websites. If you serve outside New Jersey, check whether your state's version binds private brokers before you rely on it.
What Daniel's Law cannot do
The law is narrow by design, and its limits are the ones covered persons most often miss. It protects two data points, only after notice, only for named roles, and it does nothing to stop the address being rebuilt from the next public record a broker ingests. Know these before you assume you are safe.
- No notice, no duty. A broker that has never received your written notice is not violating anything, however long your address has been listed.
- It is not monitoring. Brokers re-ingest public records and buy data from each other, so listings commonly return within a few months. A notice that worked in March may need repeating in September.
- Name and workplace stay public. The Kratovil ruling made this explicit: a reporter could still say where the police director lived by town.
- Government records are a separate track. Property deeds, voter rolls and court filings held by the state are handled through the portal, not by writing to a website.
- Not every state's copy has teeth. Several 2025 laws bind only public agencies.
Covered persons are, in the end, doing the same maintenance everyone else does, just with a legal deadline behind it. Our guide to data brokers and stalking safety covers the practical layers that sit on top of the law.
If you are not covered: what works instead
Most people reading about Daniel's Law are not judges or officers. For everyone else the tools are the free opt-outs each people-search site runs, California's state-run DROP platform for residents there, and periodic re-checking. None of these carries a $1,000 penalty, but they are the same requests the lawsuits were built on.
Every major US people-search site has a free opt-out: find your listing, submit its URL, and confirm by email. Verified removals usually process within 24 to 72 hours, and listings tend to come back within three to six months, so put a reminder on the calendar. The broker checks pages explain what each site exposes and what regulators have said about it.
Californians have one shortcut: the CPPA's DROP platform sends a single deletion request to more than 500 registered brokers, and those brokers have been required to process requests since August 1, 2026. Wherever you live, a free RedactZero exposure scan shows which brokers are likely to list you and whether your email has appeared in a known breach, and nothing you enter is stored. If you want to know whether you could sue, our guide to suing a data broker covers the other legal hooks.
See where your address is listed
Run a free exposure scan to see which data brokers likely list you, plus any breaches tied to your email - no account, nothing stored.
Frequently asked questions
Who is covered by Daniel's Law?
Active, formerly active, and retired New Jersey judicial officers, law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and child protective investigators in the Division of Child Protection and Permanency, plus immediate family members who live in the same household. If you are not one of those, the law does not apply to you.
Does Daniel's Law remove my name from people-search sites?
No. It covers only your home address and unpublished home telephone number. A site can still show your name, age, relatives, work history and other details, so covered persons usually pair a Daniel's Law notice with the site's ordinary free opt-out.
Do I have to register with the state before sending a notice to a website?
Not any more. The 2023 amendment removed the requirement that a covered person first get approval from the Office of Information Privacy before sending a notice to a private business. The state portal still handles government websites, but private-site notices go directly from you to the site.
How long does a website have to remove my address?
Ten business days from the day it receives a valid written notice. The clock does not start until the site is notified, so a listing that exists before you write is not itself a violation.
What can I recover if a site ignores my notice?
The statute says the court shall award actual damages of at least $1,000 per violation, plus attorney's fees and costs. Punitive damages are available if you prove willful or reckless disregard of the law. You can also assign your claim in writing to a company or law firm that sues for you.
Is Daniel's Law constitutional?
So far the courts have upheld it, but one question is still open. A federal judge upheld it in November 2024, the New Jersey Supreme Court upheld it as applied to a journalist in June 2025, and in August 2026 the same court held it needs no proof of fault. The Third Circuit must now decide whether liability without fault survives the First Amendment.
Does Daniel's Law protect officers outside New Jersey?
It protects people who serve or served New Jersey, and the duty applies to any person or business that publishes their address, wherever that business is based. Officers in other states should check their own state's law: about 20 similar laws or amendments passed across the country in 2025 alone.
What should I do if I am not a covered person?
Use the free opt-out every major people-search site already offers, and if you live in California use the state's DROP platform to reach every registered broker at once. Neither carries Daniel's Law's penalties, so re-check every few months and re-file when a listing returns.
Sources: New Jersey P.L.2020, c.125 (approved November 20, 2020) and P.L.2023, c.113 (approved July 20, 2023), New Jersey Legislature; Kratovil v. City of New Brunswick, A-6-24 (N.J. June 17, 2025); Atlas Data Privacy Corp. v. We Inform, LLC, D.N.J. opinion of November 26, 2024; New Jersey Globe and Clark Hill on the New Jersey Supreme Court's August 12, 2026 opinion; NJ Department of Community Affairs, Office of Information Privacy and its July 12, 2022 portal announcement; US Courts on the Daniel Anderl Judicial Security and Privacy Act and the National Conference of Bankruptcy Judges implementation guide; ROI-NJ on the February 2024 Atlas filings; Troutman Pepper Locke on Maryland's act; Cisive's September 2025 state survey; California Privacy Protection Agency on DROP.