Quick Answer: Yes, STD laws in many states can criminalize people who test positive, even if they use protection or have no symptoms. These laws are often based on fear, not science, and can lead to jail time or lawsuits for not disclosing an infection.
When Laws Are Written in Fear, Not Facts
The modern history of STD-related criminalization started during the HIV/AIDS crisis of the 1980s. Faced with a deadly, poorly understood virus and a culture steeped in homophobia and sex panic, lawmakers responded with a blunt instrument: criminal statutes that made it illegal not to disclose a positive status, even if no transmission occurred.
Fast forward to today, and those same legal templates are still in place for a range of infections, including herpes, syphilis, HIV, and even HPV. According to the Center for HIV Law and Policy, more than 30 U.S. states still have laws that criminalize potential HIV exposure, and several states apply similar rules to other STDs, even when there is no proven harm or intent to transmit.
Instead of relying on science, like whether someone used a condom, had a low viral load, or even posed any real risk, these laws rely on stigma. They center around one idea: that people with STDs are dangerous and deceptive. That idea is not only outdated, it’s medically inaccurate.
People are also reading: STI Prevention Isn’t Just Condoms: How Lube, Grooming, and Hygiene Matter
What the Laws Say (And Don’t Say)
Here’s the disturbing part: you don’t have to infect someone to be prosecuted. In many states, just knowing your status and not telling a partner, even if you used protection or had no active symptoms, can result in criminal charges, civil lawsuits, or both.
| State | Criminal Penalties for STD Non-Disclosure | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| California | Yes (Misdemeanor for HIV, Civil suits for herpes) | Must prove intent to infect under HIV law |
| Florida | Yes (Felony for HIV, Syphilis, Gonorrhea) | No actual transmission required |
| New York | No HIV criminal law | Civil suits possible for herpes or HPV |
| Georgia | Yes (Felony for HIV exposure) | Disclosure must be proven by the defendant |
| Texas | No HIV-specific law | Civil litigation still occurs |
Figure 1. STD-related legal consequences by state (sample). Laws may change, always consult a legal professional for updated guidance.
And this isn’t just about HIV. A growing number of herpes lawsuits are being filed, particularly when exes discover a diagnosis post-breakup. In some cases, judges have awarded damages even without transmission, only exposure. One woman in California was awarded $1.5 million after contracting herpes from a man she said never told her his status, even though he had no active symptoms at the time of sex.
The Cost of “Protect Yourself” Culture
Health campaigns often say “get tested” or “know your status”, but what they rarely admit is that knowing can make you legally vulnerable. In legal terms, knowledge of one’s infection often shifts responsibility entirely to the person with the diagnosis, even when protection was used and no transmission occurred.
This legal asymmetry discourages testing. It punishes the people who do the right thing and know their status, while allowing those who never test to avoid legal risk entirely. A 2022 study published in the American Journal of Public Health found that HIV criminalization laws had no impact on transmission rates, but did reduce testing rates by up to 13% in states with the harshest penalties.
So let’s be blunt: if you test positive for herpes, you could face a lawsuit. If you test positive for HIV, you could face a felony charge, even if you never had symptoms, even if you didn’t know at the time, even if you used a condom.
“I Got Tested, and Then Got Arrested”
Marcus, 28, got tested for HIV in 2021 after a hookup left him uneasy. He tested positive, but had no symptoms and a low viral load. He started treatment, notified recent partners, and began using condoms consistently. Six months later, one ex accused him of not disclosing. No transmission had occurred. But Marcus was arrested under his state’s HIV exposure law.
“It felt like all the stuff I did right, getting tested, getting on meds, using protection, meant nothing. I got punished for trying to be responsible.”
The charges were eventually dropped, but the damage was done. Marcus lost his job. His face was in the local news. His private health choice had become a public scandal, because of a law built on fear, not facts.
If your heart is pounding just reading that, you’re not alone. And if you’re wondering whether testing could put you in danger, here’s what you should know, and what you can do to protect yourself.
Check Your STD Status in Minutes
Test at Home with RemediumGenital & Oral Herpes Test Kit
For Men & Women
Results in Minutes
No Lab Needed
Private & DiscreetOrder Now $75.00 $98.00
For all 2 tests
When Public Health Gets Rewritten by Courtrooms
The medical community has been loud and clear: criminalizing health conditions doesn’t reduce risk, it increases it. Major organizations like the CDC, Planned Parenthood, and the World Health Organization have publicly opposed laws that punish people for their STD status. They argue that these laws undermine trust in public health systems, discourage testing, and reinforce stigma.
In fact, many of these laws ignore core public health facts:
- Herpes is incredibly common, more than 50% of adults have HSV-1 and about 12% have HSV-2 in the U.S., many without symptoms.
- Modern HIV treatment can reduce viral load to undetectable levels, making the virus untransmittable (U=U).
- Some STDs, like HPV, are nearly impossible to avoid, even with condoms.
Yet courts rarely make room for these medical realities. Instead, cases often hinge on emotion: fear, betrayal, and assumptions about “what kind of person” would get tested and not disclose. It’s stigma in legal clothing.
The American Psychological Association has gone so far as to recommend full decriminalization of HIV status, noting that laws based on non-disclosure “run counter to everything we know about risk reduction and mental health.” Yet few states have repealed or reformed their STD laws, most remain untouched since the 1980s and 1990s.
Testing as a Legal Risk: What to Know
Here’s the paradox: the more proactive you are about testing, the more legally vulnerable you become. If you never test, you may avoid legal liability because you “didn’t know.” If you do test and know your status, even if you're asymptomatic or on treatment, you’re now expected to disclose under threat of arrest or lawsuit.
This dynamic punishes exactly the kind of behavior we want to encourage. In a survey of 1,500 adults by the Williams Institute at UCLA, 31% said they had delayed STD testing due to fear of legal or social consequences. Among queer and trans respondents, the number rose to 45%.
That fear isn’t irrational. In 2022 alone, over 80 people were prosecuted in the U.S. for HIV-related exposure crimes, most with no actual transmission involved. Many were poor, people of color, or living in rural states with limited health access.
Instead of empowering people to know their health, these laws create a chilling effect that keeps people in the dark. It becomes safer not to know.
If you’ve ever hesitated to test out of fear that “this might come back to bite me,” you’re living with the weight of these laws already.
People are also reading: The STD With No Symptoms: What Silent Chlamydia Really Does to Your Body
What the Science Says (And Why the Law Ignores It)
STD transmission is rarely simple, and almost never criminal. According to research published in The Lancet HIV, most people who transmit STDs do so unknowingly, and many cases involve asymptomatic or low-risk transmission pathways. That’s not negligence. That’s biology.
Take herpes as an example: it can shed even when no sores are visible, and most people who have it don’t know. Telling someone “you should’ve known” ignores the medical complexity, and the emotional stress, that comes with trying to make informed, ethical choices in intimate moments.
Legal systems, however, thrive on certainty. They want intent, causality, and responsibility, three things that often don’t exist in the fluid, imperfect world of sexual health. So they build laws that force clarity where science cannot.
That’s how you end up with people like Marcus, punished not for putting someone at risk, but for being informed and honest. And that’s why dozens of doctors, researchers, and advocacy groups are calling for an end to these outdated statutes.
If you're reading this and thinking, “I want to test, but I don’t want to get in trouble”, you’re the reason this article exists. Knowledge shouldn’t be a liability. It should be a tool.
Take Back Control, Without the Shame
Your sexual health is yours. Not the courts’, not your ex’s, not the state’s. It’s personal, private, and entirely valid, whether or not you've ever had an STD, whether or not you’ve told someone, and whether or not you feel ready to test again.
At-home testing can give you answers without exposing your choices to judgment or legal risk. You control the process. You decide who to tell. You decide when to act.
Whether you're dealing with herpes, HIV, or just want clarity after an exposure scare, a discreet kit puts the power back in your hands. No waiting rooms. No questions. No assumptions.
This FDA-approved combo test kit screens for multiple common infections, quietly, accurately, and quickly.
Because testing should be about empowerment, not punishment.
Consent Is a Conversation, Not a Contract
Much of the legal framework around STD disclosure treats sex like a binding agreement, where not revealing a diagnosis voids consent. But that logic is dangerously flawed. Consent is about communication, not perfection. It involves mutual risk, mutual respect, and mutual choice. And risk exists in every sexual encounter, whether disclosed or not.
No law requires someone to disclose their last negative test. No one is arrested for not revealing their number of past partners. But the moment you have a positive result, especially for something stigmatized like herpes or HIV, you’re suddenly seen as a potential criminal. That double standard turns health knowledge into a threat.
And it doesn’t actually protect anyone. As CDC researchers have noted, people are far more likely to disclose when they don’t fear legal or social retaliation. Shame makes silence more likely, not less.
STD Risk Is Complex, Here’s What Actually Matters
The idea that any disclosure failure equals harm ignores the spectrum of actual transmission risk. Context matters. Symptoms matter. Viral load matters. Protection matters. Here’s what that nuance looks like in reality:
| Scenario | Transmission Risk | Legal Risk |
|---|---|---|
| Condom used, no symptoms, no disclosure | Low to negligible (depending on infection) | High (if status known and no disclosure) |
| Unknown status, no testing history, no disclosure | Moderate (especially for asymptomatic STDs) | None (legal system treats as lack of knowledge) |
| Symptomatic and aware, disclosure given | Moderate to high (depending on action taken) | Low (mutual consent matters legally) |
| On treatment with undetectable viral load (e.g., HIV) | Effectively zero (U=U) | Still high in many states (laws don’t account for U=U) |
Figure 2. Legal and health risk rarely align. Even low-risk transmission scenarios may carry high legal consequences if disclosure was not documented.
What this shows is simple: the legal framework isn’t about actual safety, it’s about punishing disclosure failure regardless of scientific risk. And that’s a massive disconnect between law and medicine.
“I Wanted to Tell Him. I Froze.”
Selena, 22, was diagnosed with HSV-2 six months before meeting her current partner. “I had every intention of telling him before we had sex,” she says. “But the night came, and I panicked. I thought, what if he tells people? What if he leaves?” They used a condom, she had no outbreak, and they didn’t discuss it again.
“I still haven’t told him. I feel like I’m walking around with a target on my back.”
Selena’s situation isn’t rare. Disclosure is hard. It requires vulnerability, trust, and time. Legal fear makes that conversation even harder, and sometimes impossible. That’s why supportive environments, not punitive systems, are what actually protect people.
Shame is not prevention. Fear is not education. Laws built on both don’t keep us safe. They just keep us scared.
Is Legal Reform Coming?
There is movement, but it's slow. States like Colorado and California have changed or gotten rid of old STD laws. Instead of criminal laws, they now have public health laws. Advocacy groups like The Sero Project and The Center for HIV Law and Policy are working to make changes across the country, and they are having some success.
Illinois was the first state to completely get rid of its law that made HIV a crime in 2021. Michigan, Ohio, and Georgia are also looking at bills like this. These changes often get pushback from groups that are still fueled by stigma and false information, but the data is clear: decriminalization leads to better testing rates, safer disclosure, and better health outcomes for the community.
But the law changes slowly. Until then, knowing your rights, staying healthy, and being smart about what you tell people are your best defenses.
People are also reading: STD Diagnosis and Self-Worth: Why You Feel Broken, and How to Heal
FAQs
1. Can I really get arrested just for having an STD?
Unfortunately, yes, in some states, just knowing you have something like HIV or herpes and not telling a partner before sex can lead to criminal charges. Even if you used a condom. Even if no one got sick. These laws aren’t based on actual risk, they’re based on old fear and stigma that never got updated.
2. What if I didn’t know I had anything?
Then you’re usually not legally liable. That’s the messed-up part: the law often goes easier on people who don’t test, while punishing those who do. You can’t disclose what you don’t know, but in some places, testing makes you more legally vulnerable.
3. So... should I avoid testing?
No, please don’t let these outdated laws scare you away from protecting your health. Testing is power. What’s broken is the system that turns knowledge into a threat. But staying in the dark helps no one, especially you. Instead, test smart. Test privately. Use tools that don’t tie your name to a clinic if that helps you feel safer.
4. Can someone really sue me for giving them herpes?
Yep, and it’s happening more often. These are civil cases, not criminal ones, but the emotional toll can be just as brutal. In some lawsuits, people have been sued even when they didn’t know they had herpes, or didn’t pass it on. All it takes is an angry ex and a lawyer who wants to make an example of you.
5. Do condoms or treatment matter in court?
Medically, they matter a lot. Legally? Sometimes not enough. For example, someone on HIV treatment with an undetectable viral load can’t transmit the virus, full stop. But some states still prosecute them as if they're a walking danger sign. Laws often ignore science when shame gets louder than facts.
6. What counts as “disclosure” legally?
That’s the million-dollar question, and the answer varies wildly. Verbal? Text message? Inferred? Some courts say you need proof your partner knew. That means if you disclosed but can’t prove it, you could still be at risk. It’s why disclosure feels like both an act of honesty and a legal gamble.
7. What if I told my partner and they said they were okay with it?
That’s the best-case scenario, but protect yourself anyway. If possible, get consent in writing (yes, even a casual “okay” in a text). Sounds clinical? Welcome to dating under criminalization. It’s not fair, but receipts can protect you more than good intentions ever will.
8. Are only certain STDs included in these laws?
Mostly HIV, but herpes, HPV, syphilis, and even gonorrhea can be part of these laws or lawsuits. Some are spelled out in criminal codes; others show up in court through civil claims for “emotional distress” or “reckless endangerment.”
9. Is this just a U.S. thing?
Mostly, yes. While some other countries have their own versions of STD-related laws, the U.S. has one of the highest rates of prosecuting people for simply having a diagnosed infection. Our legal system tends to treat sexual health like a crime scene, and that needs to change.
10. How can I protect myself without living in fear?
Knowledge is still your best armor, but how you get it matters. Use discreet at-home tests that don’t involve insurance. Read up on your state’s laws (we know, it sucks). And when in doubt? Talk to a local legal clinic or sexual health org. You deserve health and safety, not one at the cost of the other.
You Deserve Answers, Not Assumptions
If you’ve ever delayed testing because of fear, shame, or legal worry, you’re not alone, and you’re not wrong to feel conflicted. The system we live in makes it harder to do the right thing. But clarity is power, and testing doesn’t mean you’re guilty of anything, it means you care about yourself and your partners.
Whether you're navigating a new relationship, recovering from a painful disclosure, or just trying to make sense of the laws, you deserve tools that protect your health, your rights, and your peace of mind.
Don’t wait and wonder, get the clarity you deserve. This at-home combo test kit checks for the most common STDs discreetly and quickly.
How We Sourced This Article: We combined current guidance from leading medical organizations with peer-reviewed research and lived-experience reporting to make this guide practical, compassionate, and accurate. In total, around fifteen references informed the writing; below, we’ve highlighted some of the most relevant and reader-friendly sources.
Sources
1. The Sero Project: Advocacy and Legal Reform
2. Planned Parenthood: Understanding HIV and Testing
4. Criminalization of HIV Exposure: A Review of Empirical Evidence — D Harsono et al., 2017
5. Criminal Law, Public Health and HIV Transmission — Position Paper by UNAIDS
About the Author
Dr. F. David, MD is a board-certified infectious disease specialist focused on STI prevention, diagnosis, and treatment. He blends clinical precision with a no-nonsense, sex-positive approach and is committed to expanding access for readers in both urban and off-grid settings.
Reviewed by: Renée K. Lawson, MPH | Last medically reviewed: November 2025
This article is for informational purposes and does not replace medical advice.
