Rep. Eric Morrison

Reverse-keyword court orders enable the government to obtain technology search data without identifying any specific person as to which there is probable cause to believe they have committed or will imminently commit a crime. The profusion of electronic devices and apps in recent years has allowed recordation of numerous details of citizen’s everyday lives, that the government should not be permitted to collect and review at will. Such general searches allow the government to sweep in personal information about hundreds or thousands of people who are not suspected of having committed any crime. These searches are an invasion of privacy, have a potentially chilling effect on civil liberties, and sidestep requirements for individualized suspicion that are otherwise required for a lawful search. This House Substitute for House Bill No. 145 would prohibit law enforcement and courts from requesting, issuing, or enforcing reverse-keyword court orders and reverse-keyword requests, with the exception that reverse-keyword court orders and requests may be utilized to investigate suspected Class A Felonies so long as the search query returns 5 or fewer search hits. It also requires the suppression of evidence derived from an unlawful reverse-keyword search.

This Act is the first leg of an amendment to the Delaware Constitution that does all of the following: (1) Under Section 1 of this Act, limits the loss of the right to vote of an individual who is convicted of a felony to the period during which the individual is imprisoned due to the felony, or until the individual is pardoned, whichever comes first. (2) Brings Section 1 of this Act into conformity with the United States Constitution and federal law. Section 1 of this Act specifically does all of the following: (1) Removes the ability of the General Assembly to impose the forfeiture of the right of suffrage as a punishment for a crime. (2) Removes the list of felonies resulting in permanent removal of the right to vote. (3) Prohibits making the re-enfranchisement of an individual who is convicted of a felony contingent on the payment of a monetary payment of any kind. (4) Defines terms related to imprisonment and community supervision. (5) Updates the age at which a resident of this State is granted a right to vote to be 18 years or older, to conform the Delaware Constitution to the 26th Amendment to the United States Constitution. (6) Removes the durational residency requirements necessary to qualify to vote in this State. Durational residency requirements have been found unconstitutional because these requirements infringe on both the constitutional right to vote and the constitutional right to travel. See Dunn v. Blumstein, 92 S. Ct. 995 (1972) (finding 1-year residency requirement in a state and 3-month residency requirement in a county unconstitutional) and Marston v. Lewis, 93 S. Ct. 1211 (1973). A voter will still be required to be a resident at the time the voter registers. (7) Removes the literacy test requirement to qualify to vote in this State. Literacy tests have been used to disqualify Blacks and individuals who are immigrants or poor. Because of the discriminatory use of, and often subjective nature of, literacy tests, literacy tests are prohibited under federal law, see 52 U.S.C. § 10501, and likely unconstitutional under the 14th or 15th Amendment to the United States Constitution, see Oregon v. Mitchell, 91 S. Ct. 260 (1970). Section 2 of this Act removes the suspension of the right to vote as a punishment for violation of certain election offenses. Amending the Delaware Constitution requires not only the passing of the changes in this Act, but also passage of the same changes after the next general election by the next General Assembly. This Act requires a greater than majority vote for passage because § 1 of Article XVI of the Delaware Constitution requires the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members elected to each house of the General Assembly to amend the Delaware Constitution.

This Act requires that individual, group, State employee, and public assistance insurance plans provide coverage for biomarker testing, when the test is supported by medical and scientific evidence. The Act applies to all such policies, contracts, or certificates issued, renewed, modified, altered, amended, or reissued after December 31, 2027. This Act is a substitute for and differs from Senate Bill No. 120 in that this Act clarifies that it does not prevent a provision restricting coverage to services by a licensed, certified, or carrier-approved provider or facility, restrict the use of utilization management, or require coverage of biomarker testing for screening purposes or coverage of investigatory and experimental biomarker tests. In addition, the Act differs from Senate Bill No. 120 in that it applies to policies, contracts, or certificates issued, renewed, modified, altered, amended, or reissued after December 31, 2027, rather than December 31, 2026.

This Act requires that the court consider the existence of a military protective order as a factor in favor of granting an emergency protective order or a temporary sexual violence protective order. It further requires that a law-enforcement officer notify the agency that entered a military protective order against an individual, if the law-enforcement officer has probable cause to believe that the individual violated the military protective order.

This Act requires regulated utilities to establish a separate rate class for large energy use facilities that mitigates the risk of costs associated with expanding infrastructure and maintaining reliability in the face of growing demand from being shifted to residential, small business, and other electric customers. Wherever possible, the costs of large energy use facilities should be directly assigned to those facilities, and where direct assignment is not possible, the costs should be allocated to the class of large energy use facilities and not to other customer classes. To accomplish this, the Act sets forth minimum requirements for Electric Service Agreements (ESAs) and Transmission Security Agreement (TSAs) to be in place for any large energy use facility. The Commission shall promulgate regulations to implement these agreements. ESAs shall be reviewed and approved by the Commission prior to the interconnection of a large energy use facility and provide a regulatory framework to enable responsible developers of large energy use facilities to enter into agreements to fairly allocate costs among customer classes. The Public Service Commission will consider several factors in determining whether to approve an ESA, including consistency with the Commission’s regulations; whether the ESA and tariff ensure that all costs attributable to the large energy use facility are assigned to the class of large energy use facilities; whether other customers are adequately protected from the risk of paying stranded asset costs; the impact of the large energy use facility on delivering safe, adequate, and reliability electricity; the impact on the State, including the economy, other ratepayers, and environmental impacts; and the viability of the developer of the facility. In combination, the ESAs and the large load tariff shall ensure that, wherever possible, distribution infrastructure investment costs, capacity procurement costs, reliability backstop procurement costs, transmission infrastructure costs, and study costs attributable to a large energy use facility are all directly assigned to that large energy use facility. Where direct assignment is not possible, these costs should be allocated to the class of large energy use customers. The Commission shall develop an “incremental cost test” to measure the revenues and costs from a large energy use facility to ensure that there are not cost shifts to other customers. The Act further establishes interruptability requirements for large energy use facilities to ensure other customers are protected from reliability impacts caused by large energy use facilities. Facilities that construct or cause to be constructed new in state generation may exempt themselves from interruptability. Finally, the Act requires large energy use facilities to contribute to the low income fund and green energy fund at higher rates than other customers and requires large energy use facilities to contribute to renewable portfolio standard costs and qualified fuel cell provider costs. The Act takes effect upon enactment and regulated utilities must file an application to establish rates required under this Act within 180 days of the effective date.

This Act limits the restrictions a county may impose on the operation of marijuana establishments as follows: • Requires that a medical marijuana compassion center that was granted a conversion license for a retail marijuana store under § 1335B of Title 4 must be allowed to operate the retail marijuana store as a nonconforming use. • Prohibits the denial of a building permit to a licensee under § 1335B of Title 4 if the improvements comply with the physical requirements for property zoned for that use. The nonconforming use laws for each county, § 2610, § 4920, and § 6920 of Title 9 all prohibit structural alterations if a building is a nonconforming use but § 1335B(a)(1) requires that a conversion licensee continue to operate the location as a medical dispensing location. Thus, it is extremely likely that a compassion center with a conversion license for a retail marijuana store will need to make structural alterations to operate both as a medical dispensing location and as a retail marijuana store. • Requires that a county must allow the minimum hours of operation for a retail marijuana store to be 9 a.m. until 9 p.m. on Mondays through Saturdays and noon until 8 p.m. on Sundays. • In areas zoned for agricultural or industrial use, indoor, fully enclosed cultivation facilities may not be prohibited. • In areas zoned for commercial or industrial use, retail marijuana stores may be prohibited from operating only within a ½ mile of another retail marijuana store and within 500 feet of a place of worship, school, licensed child care, residential treatment facility, park, or library. The limits on county restrictions under this Act preempt and supersede all existing and future county ordinances or regulations regarding the operation of marijuana establishments. Section 2 makes corresponding changes to § 1351 of Title 4 so that section applies only to municipalities. This Act also makes technical changes to use consistent language in subsections (a) and (b) of § 1351 and § 1351A. Under § 1302(17) of Title 4, “‘marijuana establishment’” means all 4 types of entities licensed under Chapter 13 of Title 4.

Maddy summaryThis bill prohibits the sale of energy drinks on public middle and high school campuses during school hours and at school events. It directly affects schools, students, and vendors by banning these beverages in specific educational settings. The law applies to all public schools within the state during the times students are officially engaged in school activities.

This Act adds virtual currency to the money laundering definition in the criminal code and gives the State legal authority to attempt to return virtual currency for victims. It also provides that if money cannot be returned to the victims of the crime, or are outside of the United States, it should be disposed of per order of the Superior Court.

This Act is the first leg of a constitutional amendment that would require that only natural persons be allowed to vote in any election in this State, and forbid corporations and other artificial entities from voting in such elections. This Act requires a greater than majority vote for passage because § 1 of Article XVI of the Delaware Constitution requires the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members elected to each house of the General Assembly to amend the Delaware Constitution. In addition, as the first leg of a constitutional amendment, the next General Assembly must pass an act concurring with this Act for it to become part of the Delaware Constitution.

This Act is a substitute for Senate Bill No. 300. Like SB 300, this Act requires firearm dealers to obtain a state license to sell or transfer firearms under Chapter 9B instead of the license to sell deadly weapons under Chapter 9 of Title 24. Like SB 300, this Act does all of the following: -Establishes in statute factors that make a person ineligible to obtain a state license to sell or transfer firearms or to serve as a responsible person for a state license holder (licensee). -Heightens and adds more specific security requirements. -Heightens and centralizes recordkeeping and reporting requirements. -Requires background checks for contractors and volunteers with access to the licensee's firearms or performing certain tasks for a licensee. -Establishes training requirements. -Includes a recurring inspection by the DSP to ensure licensees are in compliance with State law. -Establishes civil penalties and possible license revocation in the event of violations. This Act differs from Senate Bill No. 300 as follows: -Changes the definition of firearm to reference 11 Del. C. § 222. -Removes the license fee ranges that are dependent on the number of firearms sold or transferred and instead sets flat and established license fees at $300 for an initial license and $250 to renew a state license. This Act makes corresponding changes throughout to account for the change in license fee structure. -Removes the licensee requirement to report firearm trace information to the Attorney General and the Attorney General’s publication of an annual report. Instead, firearm trace information will be provided as part of a licensee’s renewal application and will be provided to the General Assembly by the Delaware State Police (DSP). -Background checks are required once every 2 years, instead of annually. Relatedly, the background check obtained by a licensee or responsible person is valid for 2 years for purposes of applying for an initial license or a license renewal under this chapter. -Establishes December 31 of each year as the date that license renewal applications are due. Initial licenses that are granted after January 1 of each year may receive a prorated license fee. This Act makes corresponding changes throughout to account for the date change. -Changes the DSP report about licensee status from an annual report due by December 1 to a biennial report due on March 1. -Adds that the Delaware Department of Justice also has general investigative authority to investigate a breach of Chapter 9B. Under SB 300, only DSP had this authority. -Removes the requirement that a licensee maintain all security system recordings for at least 3 years. DSP shall promulgate regulations that establish how long a licensee shall maintain recordings. -The General Assembly shall expend any money collected in the Firearm Licensing Fund in furtherance of implementing this Act and Chapter 9 of Title 24. -Delays implementation and gradually phases in the requirements in this Act, beginning by July 1, 2028, with DSP notification to people with valid special licenses to sell deadly weapons under Chapter 9 of Title 24 about the changes in law and the potential that a license under this Act may be required. Changes made by this Act to Delaware’s licensing system are in recognition of a growing body of evidence that demonstrates that firearms dealers’ sales practices affect the probability of firearms entering the illegal market, and that policies designed to hold dealers accountable can curtail illegal use of firearms and the concomitant crimes. According to the Johns Hopkins University Center for Gun Violence Solutions, utilizing data from the Centers for Disease Control, firearms are used in 78% of homicides that occur in Delaware. In addition to loss of life, firearm violence has an economic impact, costing Delawareans $1.3 billion per year, which amounts to $1,236 per resident. An article in the Journal of Urban Health found that in-state trafficking was 64 percent lower in places with strong firearm dealer regulations and oversight. A study published in the American Journal of Public Health, examining 20 years of data, found that state licensing requirements and laws requiring or allowing inspections or audits of firearm dealers were independently associated with significantly lower firearm homicide rates. The ATF has oversight over firearms dealers, but its efforts are insufficient. Though the ATF aims to inspect firearm dealers at least every three years, at the rate inspections are performed, a dealer can expect inspection only once every 9 years. ATF data reveals that, when they occur, dealer inspections generally yield a large number of violations. In sum, the frequency of violations and the rarity of inspections allow the possibility that dealers are violating law each year without any corrective action by the ATF. According to data compiled by Brady United, there is State-specific evidence to suggest Delaware’s firearm licensing system would benefit from reform to protect the health and safety of our residents. According to 2017 through 2021 ATF data, 6,626 firearms were recovered in Delaware by law enforcement, after either having been used in a crime, found at a crime scene, or where the purchase or possession of the firearm was itself illegal (“crime guns”). Half of these crime guns were recovered by law enforcement within 3 years of retail purchase, which is indicative of potential firearm trafficking. The data also raises concerns about potential straw purchasing in our State, as there was a mismatch in the identity of the firearm purchaser and firearm possessor during a criminal offense in 72% of the traceable cases. Furthermore, 67% of the firearms recovered by law enforcement in this State were sourced from in-State firearm dealers. Delaware is also a significant supplier of crime guns to other states, most significantly Maryland (12.2% of the crime guns recovered come from Delaware dealers) and Pennsylvania (8.9% if the crime guns recovered come from Delaware dealers).