SB82Introduced in the Senate
Clerk fees; secure remote access to nonconfidential court records by certain attorneys.
Introduced by Saddam Salim, District 37
What does this bill do?
Plain-English breakdown
Writing a plain-English summary of this bill… this can take a few seconds the first time.
Official description
Clerk fees; secure remote access to nonconfidential court records by certain attorneys. Provides that no clerk shall charge a fee to an attorney for secure remote access to nonconfidential court records when such attorney is certified by the Virginia Indigent Defense Commission in the jurisdiction served by such clerk, provided that such attorney is currently appointed to represent a defendant in such jurisdiction and agrees to continue accepting appointments in such jurisdiction. The bill also provides that if, after receiving secure remote access for nonconfidential court records, such attorney (i) is found to have abused such privilege of such secure remote access; (ii) is removed from the Virginia Indigent Defense Commission's court-appointed attorney list; or (iii) ceases to accept appointments for representation from the granting court, the clerk may terminate the agreement granting such secure remote access. As introduced, this bill was a recommendation of the Virginia Indigent Defense Commission. This bill is identical to HB 520.
Where it stands
Acts of Assembly Chapter text (CHAP0160)
April 6, 2026
How did lawmakers vote?
House of Delegates votes
2 recorded votes · each counted separately
Senate votes
4 recorded votes · each counted separately
House of DelegatesStage: Passed House (97-Y 0-N 0-A) · February 23, 2026
97
Yes
0
No
2
Absent or Not Voting
99 delegates recorded in this House of Delegates vote. Colors show vote categories only, not whether a vote was good or bad.
What do people think?
Citizen Voice
How would you vote on this bill?
An unofficial public opinion poll. It does not affect the bill or the official vote.
One response per device. Location is self-reported and not verified. Results are informal and not a scientific survey.
See how each delegate voted
| Delegate | District | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Patrick Hope | 1 | Yes |
| Adele McClure | 2 | Yes |
| Alfonso Lopez | 3 | Yes |
| Charniele Herring | 4 | Yes |
| Kirk McPike | 5 | Yes |
| Richard Sullivan | 6 | Yes |
| Karen Keys-Gamarra | 7 | Yes |
| Irene Shin | 8 | Yes |
| Karrie Delaney | 9 | Yes |
| Dan Helmer | 10 | Yes |
Bill history
Prefiled and ordered printed; Offered 01-14-2026 26101498D
Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
Reported from Courts of Justice with substitute and rereferred to Finance and Appropriations (10-Y 5-N)
Committee substitute printed 26105930D-S1
Fiscal Impact Statement from Department of Planning and Budget (SB82)
Reported from Finance and Appropriations (10-Y 4-N)
Rules suspended
Constitutional reading dispensed Block Vote (on 1st reading) (40-Y 0-N 0-A)
Passed by for the day Block Vote (Voice Vote)
Read second time
Courts of Justice Substitute agreed to
Engrossed by Senate committee substitute (Voice Vote)
Read third time and passed Senate (28-Y 12-N 0-A)
Placed on Calendar
Read first time
Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice
Reported from Courts of Justice (22-Y 0-N)
Read second time
Read third time
Passed House (97-Y 0-N 0-A)
Enrolled
Bill text as passed Senate and House (SB82ER)
Signed by Speaker
Signed by President
Fiscal Impact Statement from Department of Planning and Budget (SB82)
Enrolled Bill communicated to Governor on March 10, 2026
Governor's Action Deadline 11:59 p.m., April 13, 2026
Approved by Governor-Chapter 160 (effective 7/1/2026)
Acts of Assembly Chapter text (CHAP0160)
Verify the information
Our commitment to neutrality
We provide factual information only. We never tell you which politicians or bills to support, and we do not rank, score, or endorse anyone.