In 2018, Progress, Setbacks Both on Display for Democrats in Del. General Assembly
The Delaware General Assembly in 2018 succeeded in passing a number of gun-safety bills and moved one step closer to passing the state's first Equal Rights Amendment. However, the year was marked by dramatic and stinging losses for other major progressive causes.
December 28, 2018 at 01:04 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Delaware Law Weekly
The Delaware General Assembly in 2018 succeeded in passing a number of gun-safety bills and moved one step closer to passing the state's first Equal Rights Amendment. However, the year was marked by dramatic and stinging losses for other major progressive causes.
Lawmakers passed a series of gun-related bills to outlaw bump stocks, crack down on straw purchases and restrict access to weapons for people determined to be a threat to themselves or others. However, the session's big-ticket gun legislation—a statewide ban on assault-style weapons—died without a vote in the Senate, despite a last-second attempt to bring the measure to the floor.
The legislation, SB 163, identified 45 types of “assault long guns” and other weapons that would no longer be approved for manufacture, sale and transport in the First State. The bill was modeled after a law in Maryland, which withstood a constitutional challenge from gun-rights advocates in 2017.
But Delaware's bill failed to clear a key committee hurdle in the Senate, dealing a blow to Gov. John Carney and Democrats who had made an assault-weapons ban the centerpiece of a legislative package to address gun violence after a lone gunman killed 17 students at Florida's Stoneman Douglas High School in February.
Some Democrats later launched a campaign to suspend the chamber's rules in order to forgo the standard process and bring the bill to an up-or-down vote. After a heated debate, two Democrats joined all Senate Republicans in rejecting the Hail-Mary maneuver.
A yearslong legislative effort to end Delaware's cash-bail system met a similar end in the session's last days, when the Senate fell three votes shy of the two-thirds majority needed to amend the state's Constitution.
Senate Bill 221, sponsored by Sen. Bryan Townsend, D-Newark, would have amended the state Constitution to expand the range of violent crimes for which pretrial release was unavailable. It had been coupled with a related measure, SB 222, which sought to create the presumption that most defendants will be released before trial with nonmonetary conditions.
Both bills were introduced in 2018 as part of a legislative package that would have moved Delaware toward the ultimate goal of eliminating its cash bail system. After the first vote failed, leaders removed SB 222 from the agenda, capping what was seen as a brutal setback for the bail-reform push.
In Delaware, constitutional amendments must clear two consecutive legislatures by a two-thirds majority, meaning that the changes proposed this session could not go into effect until 2021, at the earliest.
Supporters expect to bring both the assault-style weapons ban and bail-reform bills back in 2019 after a midterm election expanded Democrats' majority in the chamber to 12-9. However, both issues have exposed rifts in the party, and it is not clear whether either measure will pass in the next General Assembly.
Lawmakers in 2018 did, however, move one step closer to approving a state Equal Rights Amendment, which bars public- and private-sector discrimination “on account of sex.” Lawmakers have already introduced the identical second leg of the legislation, which is expected to pass easily in both chambers after the General Assembly reconvenes in January.
A federal ERA was passed by Congress in 1972 but failed to be ratified to the state. Delaware was the third state to approve the federal ERA in March 1972.
The state ERA is similar to the federal measure, but unlike the federal ERA, its scope is not limited to just the public sector, and could have an impact on private employers, attorneys have said.
The 150th General Assembly is scheduled to return Jan. 8.
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
© 2024 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 AllLatham, Finnegan Win $115M Muscular Dystrophy Drug Patent Verdict for Counterclaimant
2 minute readDelaware Supreme Court Adopts Broad Interpretation of Case Law on Anticompetition Provisions
3 minute read3rd Circuit Nominee Mangi Sees 'No Pathway to Confirmation,' Derides 'Organized Smear Campaign'
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Key Moves in the Reshuffling German Legal Market as 2025 Dawns
- 2Social Media Celebrities Clash in $100M Lawsuit
- 3Federal Judge Sets 2026 Admiralty Bench Trial in Baltimore Bridge Collapse Litigation
- 4Trump Media Accuses Purchaser Rep of Extortion, Harassment After Merger
- 5Judge Slashes $2M in Punitive Damages in Sober-Living Harassment Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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