July 1, 2016

Minnesota

H.F. 1369 / S.F. 1118 was introduced in 2011.

If enacted, the bill would have criminalized “animal facility interference,” defined as willful: (1) production of an image or sound recording at an animal facility; (2)possession or distribution of such image or sound records; or (3) entry or refusal to exit an animal facility that is not open to the public after receiving notice the facility is nonpublic.

The bills were not enacted.

*     *     *

If you would like more information or would like to speak to a member of Constantine Cannon’s whistleblower lawyer team, please click here.