Bill · H.R. 7125· House(119-HR-7125)
Stop Body Camera Paywalls Act
- Introduced
- 1/15/2026
- Last activity
- 1/15/2026 — Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Sponsored by
- Rashida Tlaib
- Cosponsors
- - 16 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, known as the "Stop Body Camera Paywalls Act," aims to prohibit charging fees for access to certain camera video footage. It requires States or local governments to certify that they do not charge the public to view or obtain copies of footage recorded by law enforcement. This includes body camera, dash camera, and surveillance footage from jails or prisons. To receive funding from certain grant programs, these entities must ensure no financial or monetary costs or court fees are imposed for this access. Failure to provide this certification makes the State or local government ineligible for specific grant funding.
Yes· 3 of 13
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?+6
The bill directly increases government transparency by prohibiting fees for accessing law enforcement camera footage.
Does this change how police departments operate?+5
The bill increases police transparency by requiring that body camera, dash camera, and jail surveillance footage be accessible to the public without charge.
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?+4
The bill removes financial barriers that might prevent low-income individuals from accessing important law enforcement footage.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Free access to footage: Members of the public can view, access, or obtain copies of certain camera video footage without facing any financial or monetary costs or court fees (Section 2(a)).
-
Expanded scope of available footage: The bill ensures access to various types of law enforcement media, including body camera footage, dash camera footage, and surveillance footage from jails or prisons (Section 2(c)(2)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No specific negative impacts are mentioned in the provided text.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Low Income Households+4Good For African Americans+3Good For Asian Americans+3Good For Hispanic Americans+3Good For Native Americans+3Good For Urban Residents+3Good For White Americans+3Good For Middle Class Households+2Good For People With Disabilities+2
- Governance And Ideology
- Improves Government Transparency+6Increases Federal Power+2
- Social Issues And Justice
- Improves Policing Reform+5Improves Racial Equity+3
- 1/15/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 16 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
- 1/13/2026
- Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H697)
Yvette ClarkeDemocrat · New York
Dwight EvansDemocrat · Pennsylvania
Adriano EspaillatDemocrat · New York
Jesús GarcíaDemocrat · Illinois
Adelita GrijalvaDemocrat · Arizona
Henry JohnsonDemocrat · Georgia
Summer LeeDemocrat · Pennsylvania
LaMonica McIverDemocrat · New Jersey
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Donald NorcrossDemocrat · New Jersey
Ilhan OmarDemocrat · Minnesota
Ayanna PressleyDemocrat · Massachusetts
Delia RamirezDemocrat · Illinois
Melanie StansburyDemocrat · New Mexico
Lateefah SimonDemocrat · California
Nydia VelázquezDemocrat · New York