By Maria Pemberton
A landmark data privacy bill restricting how companies collect and sell sensitive personal information continues to be debated by Senate and House legislators as a deadline to reconcile their versions approaches in January.
The Massachusetts Data Privacy Act would limit how companies collect and sell users’ sensitive data, such as health information and geolocation data. House and Senate negotiators were appointed to a conference committee in June, held their first meeting in July and continue to attempt to remedy differences between the two versions regarding the scope of sensitive data sales and enforcement.
Sen. Cynthia Creem, D-Newton, the Senate chair of the conference committee and Brookline’s representative in the Senate, called these protections a “top priority” as negotiations progress.
“I’m grateful to my House and Senate colleagues for their diligent work and continued partnership, and I remain committed to reaching a strong final bill that provides Massachusetts residents with the comprehensive data privacy protections they deserve,” Creem’s office said in an email statement to Brookline.News.
The Senate bill passed 40-0 in September 2025, and the House passed its own version of the legislation 146-0 in June 2026.
The sale of sensitive data has been a source of contention, as the Senate version bans the sale of all sensitive data –– such as immigration status, health and demographic information –– while the House bill only bans precise geolocation data. Under the House bill, consumers could opt in to the sale of other sensitive data.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts has been a vocal supporter of banning the sale of all sensitive data, along with Planned Parenthood and Reproductive Equity Now. The ACLU of Massachusetts said restricting the sale of sensitive data, including precise location, protects at-risk groups such as domestic violence survivors and people seeking and providing reproductive health care.
“The coalition is broad and large because it represents the reality that there are lots of different types of people who are concerned about an industry that engages in the sale and trade of our most sensitive information, including information showing where we go 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year,” said Kade Crockford, director of technology and justice programs at the ACLU of Massachusetts.
The ACLU also supports the Senate’s data minimization provision, which would allow companies to collect sensitive data only when it is “strictly necessary” to provide a product or service.
The American Telemedicine Association’s advocacy branch, ATA Action, says the data minimization standard in the Senate bill is “unworkable,” and says this rigid framework could limit the range and quality of health services and technologies available to patients.
The House bill, which ATA Action says it prefers, includes a “reasonably necessary and proportionate” data minimization standard and requires disclosures to consumers when processing personal data.
“We encourage Massachusetts lawmakers to adopt clear, workable standards that give consumers meaningful control over their information without creating unnecessary barriers to care or overwhelming patients with burdensome consent requirements,” said Hunter Young, ATA Action’s head of state government relations, in a statement.
The bills also differ on enforcement. The Senate version allows enforcement only by the attorney general, and the House bill permits private lawsuits against large data holders that process the personal data of more than 2 million consumers or sensitive data of more than 200,000 consumers.
The ACLU of Massachusetts said the ability to sue is “absolutely critical” as the final legislation takes form.
“The worst case scenario, besides [legislators] not passing any law, would be passing a good law that has weak enforcement,” Crockford said. “That would mean that the companies could simply ignore the law.”
Both chambers must approve a final bill by the end of the formal session on Jan. 5, 2027 . It would then be sent to be signed or vetoed by Gov. Maura Healey.
This article originally appeared in Brookline.News.
