Plan for Civil Rights Division in AG's Office Passes First Hurdle; Final Approval Expected
Legislation to strengthen civil rights enforcement in Connecticut passed the Judiciary Committee this week. The state House and Senate and, ultimately Gov. Ned Lamont, are expected to approve the measure.
April 10, 2019 at 04:36 PM
4 minute read
The creation of a civil rights division within the Office of the Connecticut Attorney General moved one step closer to reality this week when the state Legislature's Judiciary Committee approved the measure 24-15.
The state House and Senate are expected to sign off on the legislation, which Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont is expected to sign into law this session, which ends June 5.
More than 20 states, including New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts, have civil rights divisions within their attorney general's offices. Creating such an agency was a cornerstone of William Tong's campaign when he ran for attorney general last year. Now that he has won the job, Tong told the Connecticut Law Tribune Wednesday that such a division is needed more than ever.
“I think everyone understands that our civil rights are under attack in a profound and never-before-seen way, that people are continuing to suffer various forms of discrimination and violations of their civil rights, whether that be from violation of their civil rights, or from housing discrimination to gender, race, religion and gender identity,” Tong said. “There are so many people discriminated against on a daily basis at work and in their communities.”
The new division, which would expand the powers of the office of the attorney general, would work hand-in-hand with the state's Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, which receives discrimination complaints and investigates them.
But Tong said, “there is a huge enforcement gap.”
“We have strong civil rights laws here in Connecticut, but those rights do not mean anything if there is no remedy,” he said. “That's where I would come in. We would be stepping in with the enforcement muscle to vindicate the rights of people across Connecticut.”
Under House Bill 7222, the office would be able to proactively investigate and litigate in state and federal court when there are civil rights violations. The bill would also allow the office to bring civil suits on behalf of victims, and seek damages of up to $10,000 per violation.
The state would step in, Tong said, “when there is a clear interest to step in.”
“We will not be representing individuals as their lawyers, but rather asserting the interest of the state and protecting all of our citizens,” the attorney general said.
Most of those who spoke on the proposed legislation during a public hearing last month were in favor of the creation of the proposed civil rights division.
But opponents included the National Federation of Independent Business, which advocates on behalf of small and independent business owners.
“NFIB is concerned that the bill, as currently drafted, is too broad and could potentially result in costly new civil investigations, litigation, and/or enforcement actions being brought against small business owners by the Office of Attorney General for an allegation of violation of any state or federal law,” Andy Markowski, the group's state director in Connecticut, wrote. “After all, just one frivolous lawsuit can force a small business to close its doors forever.”
Tong disagrees, and said the venture would have the support of the business community.
“I believe small and large businesses across Connecticut support strong civil rights enforcement because civil rights violations and not respecting the civil rights of consumers and employees is inefficient and bad for business,” Tong said. “I'd think that all businesses would want to root out the bad actors.”
Read More:
Guns, Marijuana and a Civil Rights Division Within AG's Office Is On Legislative Docket This Session
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJudge Slashes $2M in Punitive Damages in Sober-Living Harassment Case
Judge Sinks Goodwin's Request for New Trial After Jury Sides With Boston Police in Wrongful-Death Suit
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibbons Reps Asylum Seekers in $6M Suit Over 2018 ‘Inhumane’ Immigration Policy
- 2DC Judge Chutkan Allows Jenner's $8M Unpaid Legal Fees Lawsuit to Proceed Against Sierra Leone
- 3Internal Whistleblowing Surged Globally in 2024, so Why Were US Numbers Flat?
- 4In Resolved Lawsuit, Jim Walden Alleged 'Retaliatory' Silencing by X of His Personal Social Media Account
- 5Government Attorneys Face Reassignment, Rescinded Job Offers in First Days of Trump Administration
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250