Privacy Law
AB 322: An Attempt to Place Guardrails on the Collection of Precise Geolocation Information
By: Shivangi Yadav
Status: As of August 29, 2025, held under submission by the Senate Appropriations Committee and changed to a 2-year bill.
A user’s precise geolocation[i] data can be utilized by businesses and government agencies for a great variety of purposes, like mapping, navigation, targeted advertisements, market research and emergency services, to name a few. While precise geolocation data can be helpful in providing the above services, many people appear to be more sensitive about information related to their whereabouts as compared with many other types of personal information that may be equally revealing about their daily lives. Thus, California law treats precise geolocation as a user’s sensitive personal information, because it can be used to disclose a person’s address and places they regularly visit, which in turn can reveal or allow inferences regarding certain private information like their health, religious beliefs, or political views.
The most common way to ascertain a person’s precise geolocation is by accessing data connected with the use of that individual’s mobile phone. Businesses, such as data brokers, have used consumers’ precise geolocation data to profile[ii] them and sell their data for profit without the consumer’s knowledge or consent. To address this issue, Assemblymember Christopher Ward introduced AB 322- Precise Geolocation Information this year in June.
Background: From AB 1355 to AB 322
Before introducing AB 322, Assemblymember Ward had introduced AB 1355 in February 2025. Key provisions of AB 1355 included a ban on the sale of location data, the requirement for covered businesses to provide notice of location data collection and to obtain consent of the consumers before collecting data, in addition to requiring covered businesses to display a location privacy policy spelling out, among other things, data retention limits. The bill also prohibited state and local agencies from monetizing location information. AB 1355 failed to pass and was criticized as complex, duplicative, overly broad and infeasible.
In June 2025, Assemblymember Ward revived AB 1355 by gutting AB 322, a bill on student health, and amending it into a bill on precise geolocation. Assemblymember Ward, during the press conference for AB 322, stated that various technology companies and data brokers are harvesting geolocation data from consumers’ phones without their knowledge and consent. That geolocation data is used to map a consumer and all the places a consumer visits. This can reveal or allow inferences with respect to other types of sensitive information about the consumer, like their medical needs, sexual orientation, religious and political beliefs making them vulnerable to attacks and surveillance. He further stated that Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) have used geo fencing and purchased precise geolocation information from data brokers to track, target and detain individuals.
AB 322 seeks to amend the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and add a layer of additional protection to the geolocation data.
Key Provisions of AB 322
If enacted, the bill would:
- Require all businesses collecting precise geolocation information data to provide notice of collection of precise geolocation information. Any such notice would have to contain the name, telephone number and website address of the business and the type of precise geolocation being collected, among other things.
- Place an overall one-year limit on the retention of precise geolocation information data (with a shorter 30-day limit for certain types of security related data) and ban the sale, lease and trade of that information.
- Prohibit businesses from disclosing their customer’s precise geolocation information to state and local agencies without a court order and to federal agencies unless required by federal law.
Impact and Criticism of AB 322
Consumer Reports, a bill co-sponsor, described AB 322 as a ‘common sense protection’ of precise location information. Consumer Reports in its support of AB 322 expressed that the bill would be essential in preventing ‘location information-driven harms’ like stalking, spying, scamming, nonconsensual sale of data and misuse of location data in case of data breaches at data brokers system.
The California Initiative for Technology and Democracy (CITED), another bill co-sponsor, stated that protecting location data is not just protecting privacy of individuals but also democracy. As per CITED, AB 322 is an important piece of legislation that would prevent the misuse of sensitive personal information like geolocation information.
While AB 322 garnered support, it also attracted some criticism. The California Chamber of Commerce, along with other organizations, opposed AB 322 unless it was amended. While the California Chamber of Commerce applauded AB 322, they also described it as an overly burdensome legislation that undermines the existing protections laid down in the CCPA. The bills critics emphasized that users already have the ability to modify the setting of their devices, browsers or apps to restrict collection of geolocation information, thereby retaining ultimate control over their precise geolocation data.
The recommended amendments to the bill included:
- Removal of the notice requirements in subdivision (a) of the bill as they are already laid out in the CCPA.
- Removal of the data retention limits in the bill as arbitrary and putting businesses in jeopardy.
- Removal of the limitations placed on state and local agencies as the CCPA and California Electronic Privacy Act (CalECPA) already contain adequate protections.
Conclusion
While AB 322 was shelved by the Senate Appropriations Committee during the 2025 legislative session, California legislators appear to support banning the sale of geolocation information to prevent misuse of such information. States like Oregon and Maryland have already passed legislation that bans the sale of precise geolocation information, thus setting a benchmark for the protection of such information. There has been no regulatory development regarding the protection of geolocation data at the federal level, however, the FTC has recently prohibited several data brokers from selling precise geolocation data. As a two-year bill, Assemblymember Ward may potentially renew his efforts to pass AB 322 during the 2026 legislative session.
Related Articles:
- SB 690: A Potential Pause in CIPA Litigation – By Anokhy Desai
- Signed and Vetoed California AI, Privacy, and Technology-Related Bills – By Kewa Jiang
- SB 420 and Automated Decision Systems: California’s Next Step on AI Regulation – By Adriana Beach
[i]‘Precise Geolocation’ is any data that is derived from a device and that is used or intended to be used to locate a consumer within a geographic area that is equal to or less than the area of a circle with a radius of 1,850 feet, except as prescribed by regulations (California Consumer Privacy Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.140(w)).
[ii] ‘Profiling’ means any form of automated processing of personal information, as further defined by regulations pursuant to paragraph (15) of subdivision (a) of Section 1798.185, to evaluate certain personal aspects relating to a natural person and in particular to analyze or predict aspects concerning that natural person’s performance at work, economic situation, health, personal preferences, interests, reliability, behavior, location, or movements (California Consumer Privacy Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 1798.140(z)).