Maine Tenant Data Privacy Law 2026: $1,000 Damages Floor

14 M.R.S.A. Section 6025-B bars a landlord or a landlord's agent from disclosing a tenant's personal information with the intent to harass, intimidate, or otherwise cause the tenant to vacate the unit, unless the tenant has given express consent to that disclosure.

[Cite: 14 M.R.S.A. § 6025-B, created by LD 2176, PL 2025, c. 767]

The key element is intent. This isn't a blanket ban on a landlord ever mentioning anything about a tenant to anyone. It targets disclosure specifically made with the purpose of pushing a tenant out or making them uncomfortable enough to leave.

The statute lists specific categories of sensitive personal information covered by this prohibition: immigration status, racial or ethnic origin, health conditions, financial information, and crime-victim status.

[Cite: 14 M.R.S.A. § 6025-B, created by LD 2176, PL 2025, c. 767]

Immigration status draws the most attention given the political context behind this bill, but the statute reaches well beyond it. A landlord who discloses a tenant's health condition or financial situation with harassing intent falls under this same prohibition, not a separate or lesser standard.

A tenant harmed by a violation can recover actual damages or $1,000, whichever is greater, along with injunctive relief.

[Cite: 14 M.R.S.A. § 6025-B, created by LD 2176, PL 2025, c. 767]

That $1,000 figure functions as a floor, similar to statutory damages floors found elsewhere in landlord-tenant law. A tenant doesn't need to prove $1,000 in actual, quantifiable harm to recover that amount; it's available regardless, with actual damages available instead only when they exceed that floor.

If a tenant obtains judgment following a contested hearing, reasonable attorney's fees are also recoverable.

[Cite: 14 M.R.S.A. § 6025-B, created by LD 2176, PL 2025, c. 767]

That fee-shifting provision is tied specifically to a contested hearing outcome, which gives a tenant with a genuine claim a more realistic path to finding legal representation, since the cost of pursuing the claim isn't simply absorbed out of whatever damages are eventually recovered.

This law isn't written to block every disclosure of tenant information under any circumstance. Specific exceptions allow disclosure in response to a valid discovery request, subpoena, or judicial warrant; to law enforcement when the disclosure relates to exigent circumstances; and when reasonably necessary to prevent or prosecute a criminal act.

[Cite: independent legislative reporting on LD 2176's amended exceptions, Maine Morning Star]

Separately, the restriction applies only outside the judicial process already built into Maine's eviction statute, and doesn't reach a disclosure made for a legitimate business purpose.

[Cite: independent legislative reporting on LD 2176's amended exceptions, Maine Morning Star]

Landlord representatives raised concerns during this bill's committee process that an earlier version would have prohibited disclosures genuinely necessary within a court-ordered eviction proceeding itself.

[Cite: independent legislative reporting on LD 2176's committee amendments, Maine Morning Star]

The amended version specifically addresses that concern by carving out disclosures made within the eviction statute's own judicial process. A landlord using tenant information as part of a properly filed eviction case, rather than as an intimidation tactic outside that process, isn't the conduct this law targets.

Beyond the eviction-process carve-out, the law also permits information sharing connected to a property sale or refinancing, administration of a housing benefit program, and municipal requests such as code enforcement or fire inspection.

[Cite: independent legislative reporting on LD 2176's amended exceptions, Maine Morning Star]

Those exceptions cover much of the routine business context in which a landlord might legitimately need to share tenant information, distinct from the harassment-intent scenario the law is actually built to address.

This bill did more than create the new disclosure prohibition. A separate section increased the existing statutory damages for a landlord's unlawful entry into a tenant's unit, raising the figure from $100 to $250, whichever is greater than the tenant's actual damages.

[Cite: 14 M.R.S.A., unlawful entry provision as amended by LD 2176, PL 2025, c. 767]

That change is easy to overlook in coverage focused on the immigration-status angle of this bill, but it's a real, independent increase to an existing tenant remedy that applies regardless of whether the disclosure provision is ever implicated.

LD 2176 became law without the Governor's signature on April 22, 2026, carrying no emergency clause. That means it followed Maine's standard general effective date for nonemergency legislation passed during the 132nd Legislature's Second Regular Session, which the Legislature's own leadership confirmed as July 29, 2026.

[Cite: Speaker of the Maine House, statement on the 132nd Legislature's general effective date]

A landlord shouldn't confuse the April 2026 enactment date with the date this law actually became enforceable; the roughly three-month gap between those two dates is standard for Maine legislation without an emergency clause, not an error or a separate deadline.

The practical starting point is training leasing and property management staff to never disclose a tenant's immigration status, racial or ethnic origin, health condition, financial information, or crime-victim status to a third party as leverage in a dispute, or in any context where the intent could reasonably be characterized as pressuring the tenant to leave.

Documenting the legitimate business purpose behind any disclosure of tenant information, a property sale, a refinancing application, a benefit program verification, or a municipal inspection request, creates a clear record distinguishing routine, permitted disclosures from the kind of harassment-intent conduct this law specifically targets.