Unanimously Approved State Legislation Imposes “significant penalties” on Stalkers Who Use Remote Tracking Tech on Victims

By B.N. Frank

Remote tracking technology includes more than Apple AirTags (see 1, 2, 3), though AirTags currently seem to be the most controversial, leading to a class-action lawsuit filed last year. More recently, Indiana state lawmakers passed legislation to enact significant penalties on those who use tracking tech on others without their consent.

From Gov Tech:

Indiana OKs Penalties for Remote Tracking Without Consent

State lawmakers gave final approval to legislation imposing significant penalties on any person who uses remote tracking devices to keep tabs on someone without their consent.

Dan Carden, The Times

(TNS) — State lawmakers gave final approval Monday to legislation imposing significant penalties on any person who uses an Apple AirTag or other remote tracking device to keep tabs on a former romantic partner or to track anyone without their consent.

Senate Enrolled Act 161 makes the unlawful use of a remote tracking device in most cases a felony, punishable by up to 2 1/2 years behind bars for a repeat offense or if the person being tracked has a protective order against the tracker, or six years in prison if the equipment is used for stalking.

In addition, the measure authorizes prosecutors to seek a penalty enhancement of up to six additional years in prison if the person employing a remote tracking device commits another felony causing serious bodily injury while using the equipment.

Sen. Michael Crider, R-Greenfield, the sponsor, said he was inspired to file the legislation by a woman living in his Senate district who nearly was killed when a former romantic partner used a remote tracking device to catch up to her after she attempted to get away from the partner.

Crider said that’s increasingly common in domestic violence incidents and divorce cases in Indiana, where attorneys tell him that, more than half the time, one partner is tracking the other without consent, even if a protective order is in place.

“Technology is either wonderful or awful, depending on how it’s used,” Crider said. “We’re trying to do what we can to protect those people who have sought out protective orders and make sure that order does provide that layer of protection that they’re seeking.”

The legislation defines a tracking device as equipment that stores geographic data for subsequent analysis, equipment allowing real-time monitoring, an unmanned aerial vehicle, a mobile phone, or an electronic device that communicates a person’s location to another person’s mobile phone, such as an AirTag.

It specifies that the prohibition does not apply to devices used to track family members, unless the family member has a protective order in place; a person tracking their own property; people in the criminal justice system; police engaged in lawful duties; devices installed by auto manufacturers; toll road cameras; or electronic devices when the user is advised of its tracking capabilities.

The proposal was co-sponsored by, among others, Sen. Ed Charbonneau, R-Valparaiso.

It was approved 91-0 by the House and 45-0 in the Senate; it heads next to Republican Gov. Eric Holcomb to be signed into law.

The statute would take effect July 1 if it’s enacted by the governor.

It’s also worth mentioning that remote tracking devices like Apple AirTags can emit high levels biologically harmful electromagnetic fields (EMF) including Bluetooth and/or other sources of wireless “Wi-Fi” radiation. Exposure can cause undesirable symptoms and illnesses to those being tracked. Some might consider that to be punishment-worthy as well.