The bill would add a new provision to Title 18 creating a crime around doxxing. It defines who counts as a covered person involved in special operations, and lists the kinds of information considered restricted.
It then makes it illegal to publicly publish that information about a covered person or their immediate family with intent to threaten or facilitate violence, with corresponding penalties.
At a Glance
What It Does
It adds 18 U.S.C. §120, protecting covered persons by prohibiting the publication of restricted personal information and by defining the offense and penalties.
Who It Affects
Directly affects members of the U.S. special operations forces, certain DoD personnel designated for sensitive activities, and federal law enforcement officers attached to or working with these units, along with their immediate families.
Why It Matters
It creates a federal legal framework to deter doxxing that could threaten personnel and missions, clarifying what information is protected and how violations are punished.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill adds a new section to the criminal code aimed at preventing doxing of special operations personnel. It defines who is protected under the law—the personnel themselves and certain DoD and federal officers designated as part of special operations—and it identifies what information is protected.
Restricted personal information includes the person’s name tied to their employment, facial likeness, home address, birth date, social security number, contact information, and biometric data. Publishing this information about a covered person or their immediate family with the intent to threaten or facilitate violence would be illegal.
Violations carry fines and potential imprisonment, with heightened penalties if the publication leads to death or serious bodily injury. The bill also adds a codified section to the U.S. Code’s Chapter 7 outlining these definitions, offenses, and penalties.
The overall aim is to reduce the risk to personnel and their families posed by doxxing, thereby protecting sensitive operations and national security interests.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill defines a new set of protected individuals called “covered persons,” including military, DoD personnel, and certain federal officers.
Restricted information includes name tied to employment, home address, contact details, birth data, and biometric data.
Publishing restricted information about a covered person or their immediate family with intent to threaten or facilitate violence is illegal.
Penalties include fines and imprisonment, with life imprisonment if death or serious bodily harm results.
A new section (18 U.S.C. §120) is added to Title 18 to codify definitions, offenses, and penalties.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Protection of Special Operations Personnel (definitions and framework)
Sec. 2 adds a new section to Chapter 7 of Title 18 establishing the scope and structure for protecting special operations personnel. It defines who is a “covered person,” including members of the special operations forces, designated DoD employees, and federal law enforcement officers attached to such units, and it introduces “restricted personal information” that should not be publicly released. This section lays the groundwork for what counts as prohibited doxxing and sets up the terminology used throughout the bill.
Definitions: Covered person and restricted data
Section 120(a) provides the core definitions. It delineates who is protected (the covered person) and what constitutes restricted personal information (names tied to employment, likeness, home address, contact details, dates, biometric data, etc.). It also specifies that the term ‘immediate family’ covers those connected to the covered person, clarifying who benefits from the protections.
Offense: Prohibition on publishing restricted personal information
Section 120(b) creates the offense: knowingly making restricted personal information about a covered person or their immediate family publicly available with the intent to threaten, intimidate, or facilitate violence. It ties the act to the purpose of enabling violence against the protected individual or family, establishing a clear criminal threshold for liability.
Penalties: Fines and imprisonment
Section 120(c) specifies penalties. For standard violations, the offender faces fines and up to 5 years’ imprisonment, with the possibility of longer terms if death or serious bodily injury results, potentially lifer imprisonment. This creates a tiered penalty structure linked to the severity of the outcome.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Defense across all five countries.
Explore Defense in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Members of U.S. special operations forces who gain direct protection from doxxing.
- DoD personnel designated to conduct sensitive activities who face fewer threats to their personal information.
- Federal law enforcement officers attached to or working with special operations units who face targeted harassment risks.
- Immediate family members of these covered persons who have personal information at risk.
- Unit commanders and security officers who bear responsibility for personnel safety and risk management.
Who Bears the Cost
- Individuals who publish restricted personal information and could face criminal liability.
- Online platforms or publishers who host or disseminate doxxing content and may be subject to enforcement actions.
- Federal prosecutors and courts that would handle cases under the new statute, with associated resource needs.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
Protecting personnel and their families from doxxing while avoiding overbreadth that could chill legitimate speech or hinder transparency about security concerns.
The bill creates a clear boundary between privacy protections and free expression by criminalizing doxxing of highly sensitive information tied to individuals in specialized units. However, the definitional scope—especially what counts as restricted personal information and what constitutes the requisite “intent” to threaten—could raise questions of breadth and enforceability.
Practical challenges include verifying whether information was published with the stated intent and distinguishing legitimate reporting of safety concerns from doxxing; the potential chilling effect on public discourse about national security issues must be watched. Cross-jurisdictional data issues and the interplay with other privacy or antiharassment laws will also shape how this provision is applied.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.