Delaware Bills

This Act is modeled after American Laws for American Courts legislation that has passed in Tennessee, Louisiana, Arizona, Kansas, South Dakota, Alabama, and North Carolina. The Declaration of Independence announced the formation of a new country that would no longer find itself in the clutches of a foreign power. For over 2 centuries, hundreds of thousands of men and women have given their lives to protect America’s sovereignty and freedom. America has unique values of liberty which do not exist in all foreign legal systems such as freedom of religion, speech, and press; due process; and the right to privacy. Unfortunately, because state legislatures have generally not been explicit about what their public policy is relative to foreign laws, the courts and the parties litigating in those courts are left to their own devices. State legislatures play a vital role in preserving fundamental constitutional rights and American values of liberty and freedom. No United States citizen or resident should be denied these guaranteed liberties, rights, and freedom.

Under this Act, notice for a mediation conference must be made by registered or certified mail, with restricted delivery and return receipt requested, for any of the following Title 13, Family Court matters: (1) Child support. (2) Custody or visitation. (3) Guardianship. (4) Third-party visitation. This Act also provides that: - It is the party’s duty to provide the Court with the party’s mailing address. - Notice by registered or certified mail is not required if a party has provided a written waiver. - The Court may excuse the registered or certified mail requirement in whole or in part if the number of parties in a case is voluminous and the address of record for each party has been confirmed in writing, either by other service or written notice provided by the party. - Notice provided under this Act constitutes conclusive evidence of service and mediation may proceed with or without the party’s appearance.

Since 1975, the Delaware Population Consortium has prepared a unified set of statewide population projections each year. These projections are used for a variety of purposes including capital planning, policy analysis, comprehensive planning, and transportation planning. All 3 counties are required by State law to utilize these projections to prepare their required comprehensive plans. However, the Delaware Population Consortium does not exist in State law. This Act formally creates the Delaware Population Consortium, identifies its membership and work products, and requires that all counties, municipalities, school districts, and State agencies use the Consortium’s projections for planning and policy purposes.

This House Resolution recognizes Sunday, May 12, 2019 as a very special day for all mothers in the State of Delaware and calls on all Delawareans to reflect on the many selfless acts of their own mothers.

This Concurrent Resolution recognizes May 9, 2019 as Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority or “AKA Day at the Capitol” in Delaware.

This House Concurrent Resolution outlines the need for expansion of the exchange network between school and county libraries and requests that the Secretary of State develop and implement such expansion.

This House Concurrent Resolution recognized April 25, 2019 as the 50th Anniversary of the enactment of Delaware’s Equal Rights to Housing Act. The House Concurrent Resolution further recognizes May 9, 2019 as a Celebration of a Day for Housing in the State of Delaware.

This Substitute Act takes the place of Senate Bill No. 68 (150th General Assembly) and removes the voluntary certificate of possession process. In all other respects this Act is similar to Senate Bill No. 68. Specifically, this Act prohibits the manufacture, sale, offer to sell, transfer, purchase, receipt, possession, or transport of assault weapons in Delaware, subject to certain exceptions. One exception relevant to individuals is that the Act does not prohibit the possession and transport of firearms that were lawfully possessed or fully applied for before the effective date of this Act; although for these firearms there are certain restrictions relating to their possession and transport after the effective date of this Act. This Act is based on the Firearm Safety Act of 2013 (“FSA”) passed in Maryland in the wake of the tragic slaughtering of children on December 14, 2012, at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. The FSA’s assault weapons ban was upheld as constitutional on February 21, 2017, by the full membership of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in the case of Kolbe v. Hogan, 849 F.3d 114 (4th Cir. 2017). The names Newtown, Aurora, San Bernardino, Orlando, Las Vegas, and Parkland, among others, have become synonymous with tragic killing of innocent, unsuspecting Americans of all ages and backgrounds, amidst a framework of federal and state laws that have permitted the purchase of weapons designed for the battlefield — not for our schools, our theaters, our places of worship, or our homes. Safety — both for the general public, as well as members of Delaware's law-enforcement community — is the objective of this Act, as it was for the FSA. And, as with the FSA, a primary goal of this Act is to reduce the availability of assault weapons so that when a criminal acts, he or she does so with a less dangerous weapon and less severe consequences. Relying on United States Supreme Court precedent from District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), as well as the holdings of its sister circuits, the full Fourth Circuit concluded that the assault weapons banned by the FSA are not protected by the Second Amendment. The Fourth Circuit was convinced that the banned assault weapons are among those arms that are “like” “M-16 rifles” — “weapons that are most useful in military service” — which the Heller Court singled out as being beyond the Second Amendment’s reach. The Fourth Circuit concluded that Maryland had presented extensive uncontroverted evidence demonstrating that the assault weapons outlawed by the FSA are exceptionally lethal weapons of war. The Fourth Circuit also concluded that the evidence showed the difference between the fully automatic and semiautomatic versions of military-style weapons is slight. Further evidence considered by the Fourth Circuit that motivates this Act is as follows: (1) Like their fully automatic counterparts, the banned assault weapons are firearms designed for the battlefield, for the soldier to be able to shoot a large number of rounds across a battlefield at a high rate of speed, and that their design results in a capability for lethality — more wounds, more serious, in more victims — far beyond that of other firearms in general, including other semiautomatic guns. (2) The banned assault weapons have been used disproportionately to their ownership in mass shootings and the murders of law-enforcement officers. (3) The banned assault weapons further pose a heightened risk to civilians in that rounds from assault weapons have the ability to easily penetrate most materials used in standard home construction, car doors, and similar materials, and that criminals armed with the banned assault weapons possess a “military-style advantage” in firefights with law- enforcement officers, as such weapons allow criminals to effectively engage law-enforcement officers from great distances and their rounds easily pass through the soft body armor worn by most law-enforcement officers. (4) Although self-defense is a conceivable use of the banned assault weapons, most individuals choose to keep other firearms for that purpose. (5) Prohibitions against assault weapons will promote public safety by reducing the availability of those armaments to mass shooters and other criminals, by diminishing their especial threat to law-enforcement officers, and by hindering their unintentional misuse by civilians. (6) In many situations, the semiautomatic fire of an assault weapon is more accurate and lethal than the automatic fire. Finding this evidence and these conclusions by the Fourth Circuit to be strongly persuasive of the applicable framework of constitutional rights, and firmly believing that promoting the safety of the Delaware public and Delaware law-enforcement is a paramount function of the Delaware General Assembly, Delaware legislators file this Act in the name of public safety and with adherence to core constitutional principles.

This Act does all of the following: (1) Requires certain registered aircraft owners to pay an annual fee. (2) Provides exceptions for registered aircraft based in this State. (3) Directs the Department to collect fees, as provided for in this Act. (4) Requires the Department to deposit the funds collected under this Act into the Transportation Trust Fund. (5) Requires the Department to file a report with the Controller General by September 1 of each year detailing the revenue received under this subchapter and the expenditures associated with the Department’s responsibilities concerning aviation in this State. This Act takes effect on January 1, 2020.

This Senate Concurrent Resolution recognizes April 18, 2019 as "National Lineman Appreciation Day" in the State of Delaware.

This resolution proclaims May 2019 "Cystic Fibrosis Awareness Month" in Delaware.

This resolution designates May 8, 2019 as "4-H Day" in the State of Delaware and calls upon Delaware's citizens to recognize the many contributions of the State's 4-H programs.