Legislative Report

ACLU of Maryland 2013 General Assembly Report 

The ACLU of Maryland is a non-partisan organization dedicated to the preservation and enhancement of civil liberties and civil rights. We advance civil liberties and civil rights through litigation, lobbying and education. In the legislature we lobby on free speech, privacy and technology, reproductive freedom, lgbt, religious freedom, drug policies, police practices, voting rights, women's rights, racial justice, equal protection, prisoner rights, death penalty, criminal justice, immigrant rights and national security issues.

This year Maryland became the 18th state to repeal the death penalty. The ACLU of Maryland was part of a large and broad coalition working for repeal. As many of our supporters know, in 2009 the legislature came close but fell short of a full repeal, and ended up restricting the use of the death penalty. Despite those restrictions, the legislature finally came to understand that the death penalty is racially biased, expensive and ineffective as a deterrent. The ACLU of Maryland has a long history in this fight. In 1994, we mounted an unsuccessful legal challenge against the execution of John Thanos, the first Marylander to be put to death after the Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1977. There have been gains and setbacks, but we have never stopped fighting against this heinous punishment. We knew that with the dedication and hard work of inspiring coalition partners, the strong support of the Governor and a growing number of elected leaders, and evolving public sentiment, this historic day would come.

Read our testimony on SB 276 here.

Decriminalizing Possession of Small Amounts of Marijuana

Arrests and convictions for the non-violent offense of marijuana possession is a costly and wasteful practice that disproportionately targets communities of color. The ACLU supported and advocated for a bill, SB 297, which would have decriminalized possession of small amounts of marijuana. While SB 297 made historic progress by passing the State Senate, the bill stalled in the House Judiciary Committee. The ACLU will continue to be a leader in advocating for sensible and fair marijuana laws.

Read our testimony on marijuana sentencing reform.

Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel - VICTORY!

Indigent defendants' Sixth Amendment right to counsel was severely threatened by HB 153. The legislation would have terminated a defendant's representation by the Office of the Public Defender after the conclusion of the bail hearing, forcing the defendant and the OPD to go through the wasteful process of re-qualification. This bill would have infringed upon the constitutional requirement that an individual is entitled to appointed counsel during any "critical stage" of a criminal proceeding against them. And the legislation would have especially penalized and threatened the rights of people of color, as there are wide racial disparities in Maryland with regard to who is arrested and detained. Despite both the Senate and the House of Delegates passing versions of the bill, the ACLU and a strong coalition of civil rights and criminal justice groups managed to defeat it in the final hours of the 2013 General Assembly session. The ACLU will continue to be a leader in defending poor persons' constitutional rights to counsel by public defenders.

Read our testimony on HB 153 here.

Task Force to Study Private Diversion Programs

The ACLU of Maryland supported SB 793/HB 1018, which would establish a task force to study the use of private diversion programs. The bill sought to study a growing trend, both in Maryland and around the country, of allowing private, for-profit companies to threaten criminal prosecution (using prosecutors' official letterhead) by targeting offenses such as alleged bad check writing, even if prosecutors have not conducted any meaningful review of the allegations. The letters tell recipients that they can avoid prosecution by paying hundreds of dollars to attend "financial accountability" classes offered by the private companies. In exchange, the prosecutor's office gets a share of the money raised from the classes' attendance fees.

These programs raise many troubling questions, such as whether the local prosecutor is actually investigating the claims that a crime has occurred, the adequacy of the proof of criminal violations, the degree of supervision by prosecutorial staff, the conflict of interest when investigations are conducted by companies with a financial stake in the outcome, the financial benefits to prosecutors' offices that get a portion of the program fees, and the constitutional rights of individuals subjected to these practices.

While the bills failed in committee, the ACLU of Maryland has Maryland Public Information Act requests out to the various States' Attorneys' offices to find out more about the practice.

Read our testimony on private diversion programs here.

Evidence-based policies

The ACLU supported a bill, SB 831, which would establish a committee to analyze the state operating budget using evidence-based policies. Evidence-based policies are research-based policies consisting of a systematic review of evidence, and including data analyses of studies to determine if certain policies work. Utilizing evidence-based and data-driven analyses can vastly improve the policies on which the ACLU prioritizes, including youth justice and criminal justice. SB 831 would have established a clear path for policies to, among other things, further social justice policies and increase public safety while saving substantial state money. While the bill passed the Senate, it unfortunately did not pass the House committee, but we will continue to advocate for public policies that accurately utilize evidence and data.

SAFE AND FREE

Drones

The ACLU of Maryland testified in favor of a bill that would require law enforcement to obtain a warrant prior to using a highly controversial drone to gather evidence. Though the bill did not make it out of committee, it successfully raised awareness in the legislature of the proliferation of drones and the privacy concerns that their unregulated use poses.

Read our testimony on HB 1233 here.

NDAA

The ACLU of Maryland supported HB 558, which would prohibit an agency, county or employee of the state, and others, from knowingly aiding in the detention of a person

under §§ 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. The NDAA codified indefinite military detention of civilians captured far from any battlefield - without charge or trial - for the first time in American history. Many organizations across the country have come together to speak out against the NDAA. In fact, five states and many municipalities, including the City of Takoma Park, have resolutions similar to HB 558. The bill stalled in committee.

Read our testimony on HB 558 here.

IMMIGRANTS RIGHTS

Maryland Highway Safety Act of 2013 - VICTORY!

In partnership with CASA de Maryland, SEIU, and other allies, the ACLU supported SB 715, a bill that would expand access to limited-use driver's licenses to individuals without proof of lawful immigration status or a social security number. Qualifying individuals will still be required to provide proof of two years of Maryland residence and to meet other rigorous identification requirements. This new law will have a positive impact on a large population of immigrants living in Maryland and will improve public safety on the roadways. We expect it to significantly decrease the arrest and harassment of immigrants while performing necessary activities like driving kids to school or going to work. We also hope that passage of this bill will invigorate campaigns in other states with similar pending measures.

Read our testimony on drivers licenses for immigrants here.

Nullity of Bail Bonds

The ACLU supported HB 476/SB 720, which would have nullified the bonds of immigrants who fail to show up for their state hearings either because they are in federal immigration custody or because they have been deported by federal immigration authorities. The bill would also require bail bondsmen to return any premiums paid to the individual or family member who provided the payment. The measure would help ensure that low-income immigrants and their families do not forfeit what little resources they have when their failure to appear is through no fault of their own. Absent such a law, immigrants may also have a harder time convincing bail bondsmen to post bond for them because of the perceived risk of federal detention or deportation. The bill received a favorable report from the House Judiciary Committee. Unfortunately, however, it died in the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee. We hope to try again next year, unless the issue, which is currently pending before the Maryland Court of Appeals, is resolved by a court decision before the next legislative session.

Read our testimony on SB 720 here.

E-Verify Program:

The ACLU successfully opposed a bill that would have mandated the use of E-Verify, a federal electronic employment verification program, for certain employers and contractors in the State of Maryland. The E-Verify program erodes privacy rights and worker protections, has a high error rate, and fails to incorporate sufficient due process protections for affected workers. While the federal E-Verify program may become mandatory in the future with passage of the comprehensive immigration reform bill in Congress, it is currently optional.

Read our testimony on the E-Verify program here.

Dually Enrolled Students Tuition Waiver

The ACLU supported HB 928, a measure which would clarify that dually-enrolled high school students also qualify for benefits under the Maryland DREAM Act. The purpose of the DREAM Act is to provide in-state tuition benefits to undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as children, provided they and their parents meet certain additional criteria. Dually enrolled students are an integral part of this "DREAMer" population: there are no discernible differences between them and the college students who currently qualify for in-state tuition benefits under the Act. They are among the intended beneficiaries of the DREAM Act, and its failure to explicitly account for them appears to have been an oversight that this proposed law remedies. While HB 928 died in committee, its major components were settled in a positive Attorney General opinion and then incorporated into SB 740, the College and Career Readiness and College Completion Act of 2013, which passed.

Read our testimony here on HB 928.

Public Institutions of Higher Education Legal Presence and Tuition Rates Reporting

The ACLU successfully opposed a reactionary measure that would have imposed burdensome in-state tuition reporting requirements on all Maryland institutions of higher education. The bill, which served no discernible public policy purpose, required the collection of unnecessarily detailed and invasive personal information, and imposed onerous data collection and reporting requirements on Maryland institutions of higher education. Because the bill would have required the collection and reporting of irrelevant information, such as students' country of origin and the details of their immigration status, it could have deterred the intended beneficiaries of the Maryland DREAM Act from availing themselves of the benefits to which they are entitled. The bill was given an unfavorable report by the House Appropriations Committee.

Read our testimony here.

YOUTH JUSTICE REFORM

Youth Placement -- VICTORY!

The ACLU of Maryland worked in coalition with organizations from the Maryland Youth Justice Roundtable to promote a package of five bills to reform youth justice in Maryland by "right-sizing" the populations in juvenile facilities. The ACLU's primary role was to spearhead the legislation to reduce youth incarceration for minor offenses. Against enormous odds, this legislation ultimately passed in its first year. The law - which establishes that youth with certain minor offenses should not be sent to long-term juvenile facilities - will reduce over-reliance on facilities for youth who do not present public safety concerns. The reform will also encourage juvenile officials to provide treatment and services for youth in the community while they live at home with their families. It is projected that the law will reduce youth incarceration by up to 20 percent and save the state up to $12 million.

Read our testimony here.

Other Youth Justice Bills

In addition, advocates proposed four other bills that would prohibit incarceration of youth age 13 and under; require the juvenile system to adopt graduated rewards and sanctions for youth behavior; house all youth in juvenile facilities instead of the adult system; and end the practice of automatically charging youth as adults. Ultimately, the General Assembly voted to require the juvenile justice system to develop a plan to adopt graduated responses to youth behavior and to establish a task force assessing Maryland's practices regarding youth charged as adults.

PRIVACY

Cell Phone Location Tracking

For three years, the ACLU of Maryland has advocated for a bill to require law enforcement to obtain a warrant prior to obtaining cell phone location tracking information. When turned on, a cell phone sends off a signal several times a minute. That signal reaches the closest cell towers, which then bounce the signal back, giving the phone the strongest signal from which to operate. Cell phone companies keep this information anywhere from 6 months to several years. When looked at in the aggregate, this information can give a detailed picture of where a person is or has been over a period of time. 

Currently, law enforcement in Maryland obtain that location information if it is ‘relevant to a criminal investigation.' The ACLU believes that due to the detailed information this gives about a person's life, law enforcement must obtain a warrant, based upon probable cause that the target of the information either is committing or has committed a crime, or that the location information itself is evidence of or will lead to evidence of the crime being investigated.

While there were signs early on that the bill would pass, it ultimately got bogged down over whether law enforcement must obtain a warrant for both "real-time" and "historical" (which could be five minutes ago) or just "real-time" location information. We believe that where you have been is no less private - and maybe even more so - than where you are now, so both must be included.

Read our testimony on HB 877 (supporting) here and HB 377 (opposing) here.

Social Media in Schools

Last session, the ACLU of Maryland was victorious in passing the first-in-the-country employer social media privacy bill, ensuring that employers could not force employees or applicants to turn over their social media passwords. Since then, six other states have enacted such laws. This year sponsors introduced a bill to prevent schools from requesting or requiring social media passwords from students. Unfortunately, while seven other states have enacted these bills, and the bill passed the Senate in both 2012 and the 2013, it ultimately stalled in the House.

Read our testimony on SB 838 here and HB 1332 here.

Audio Surveillance in Buses

For the last several years the ACLU of Maryland has been successful in defeating bills that would require audio surveillance on buses. This year, we supported two proactive bills that would have prohibited blanket audio surveillance on public transit. We believe that transit riders should not have to give up their fundamental right to privacy, and have all of their conversations recorded, as a condition of riding public transit in Maryland. While neither bill was successful, committee narrative was inserted into the budget to require the Maryland Transit Authority to investigate the use of the devices and any limitations on when the devices can be used.

Read our testimony in support of SB 182 here and HB 938 here.

DNA of Arrestees

Despite the opposition of the ACLU of Maryland and the Maryland State Conference of NAACP Branches, in 2009 the Maryland General Assembly, expanded upon the taking of DNA to include people arrested of certain crimes. The ACLU opposed this bill because it reversed the notion of ‘innocent until proven guilty' and, given how people of color are targeted and arrested at disproportionately higher rates than whites, it would result in their over-representation in the DNA database. Together with the Legislative Black Caucus and the Office of the Public Defender, the ACLU was able to insert several protections in the bill, in addition to a sunset provision which will caused the bill to expire in 2014. This session the legislature repealed the sunset provision, at the strong urging by the Governor.

In addition to opposing the repeal of the sunset provision, the ACLU also supported a bill that would require local jurisdictions using DNA to follow the protections set up in the 2009 bill. While this bill was filed late and got stuck in committee, the ACLU expects to support it again in 2014.

Mandatory Drug & Alcohol Testing

This session legislators introduced several bills that would have required mandatory blood testing of a driver when there was a car accident. The ACLU opposed these bills and testified that drawing blood constituted a search under the Fourth Amendment, and thus officers needed to obtain a warrant based on probable cause before they could draw blood from a driver without their consent. None of the bills passed.

Immediately post-session, our position on this bill was validated when the U.S. Supreme Court, in the case of Missouri v. McNeeley, held that law enforcement must get a warrant prior to testing blood in DUI cases. In McNeeley, the police drove the driver to a hospital and restrained him to draw his blood after he refused to take a breath test. The Court noted that drawing blood to test its alcohol concentration is "an invasion of bodily integrity" that involves an individual's "most personal and deep-rooted expectations of privacy" and upheld the Missouri Supreme Court's decision that the warrantless blood test was an unreasonable search as there was no emergency that kept the police from getting a warrant in a timely manner, before the alcohol in the driver's blood dissipated.

Date

Featured image

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Show related content

Tweet Text

Type

Menu parent dynamic listing

Show PDF in viewer on page

Style

Show list numbers

• Read more about 2013 General Assembly Report

ACLU of Maryland 2017 General Assembly Report 

 
While HB 903 / SB 705 made it further than ever before-receiving a favorable report from the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee-unfortunately, it failed to make it across the finish line. This bill, which we supported, would have allowed state courts to award attorneys' fees in successful state constitutional claims, thereby helping Marylanders whose constitutional and civil rights were violated, but many of whom have a hard time finding an attorney to represent them. The ACLU of Md will continue to fight alongside our partners for this bill in future sessions.

II.    FIRST AMENDMENT

This session, the ACLU of Md successfully opposed several bills that would have curtailed the fundamental rights of Marylanders to freely express themselves.  HB 372 would have required county boards of education to "allow" "nonsectarian student-initiated voluntary prayer" at mandatory and voluntary school-sponsored student events. This bill would likely have subjected students to organized, coercive prayer during school events.  Also, HB 1135 would have barred instructors in Maryland public institutions from expressing personal philosophical or political opinions.

HB 949 / SB 739 would have prohibited the state or any public body from entering into or renewing a contract with, among others, any person, governmental instrumentality, corporation, or non-profit organization that supports or promotes a boycott of Israel.  The bill would also have required the State's pension plan to divest from any investment funds that include companies participating in or supporting a boycott of Israel.  Finally, the bill would have required the State to create, and publish, a list of persons and organizations that participate in or support such a boycott.  While the ACLU of Maryland takes no position on the underlying boycott, we opposed the bill because it sought to penalize a particular point of view.

Fortunately, these regressive bills all failed.

II.    CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM

a.    Pretrial Reform

Last year, Attorney General Brian Frosh issued an opinion that called into question the constitutionality of bail in Maryland's pretrial system.  That opinion prompted the Judiciary to enact a rule to (1) deprioritize the use of cash bail, (2) require that cash bail be used only to ensure reappearance in court, not to address public safety, and (3) prevent courts from setting bail in an amount the defendant cannot afford.  Unsurprisingly, the bail bond industry did not take well to this reform and fought aggressively to reverse it through HB 1215 / SB 983.  Working through the broad and dynamic Coalition for a Safe and Just Maryland, the ACLU of Md and our partners successfully opposed this regressive legislation.

We also supported two progressive bills on bail reform-HB 1218, which would have eliminated the use of cash bail over time and HB 1390 / SB 880, which would have codified the Judicial Rule; created transparent and open processes for adopting needs assessment tools; and required data collection and reporting on pretrial populations.

b.    Sentencing Reform

With the passage of the landmark 2016 Justice Reinvestment Act, there were considerably fewer bills offered this session addressing criminal sentencing.  However, the ACLU did oppose some bills that sought to increase criminal penalties and supported others that aimed to reduce the overreliance on our criminal justice system for low-level, sometimes non-violent activities.  For example, we again supported HB 377 / SB 940, which would have decriminalized certain gambling offenses-bills such as this take a sensible approach toward stemming the influx of Marylanders into our jails for consensual, non-violent activity. Unfortunately, the bill did not make it out of committee this year.  However, HB 1261 did make it across the finish line-this bill repealed criminal penalties for violations of barbering laws. It has already been approved by the Governor!

c.    Prisoners' Rights

A number of bills were introduced that would have impacted the quality of life for folks behind bars.  The ACLU of Md is proud to have supported the passage of HB 459, which seeks to expand the workforce-training and post-secondary education opportunities available inside correctional facilities. We have heard time and again about the lack of programming available to those incarcerated and are glad to see the General Assembly finally take this step forward.

Picking up on the success of 2016's solitary confinement reporting bill, we supported two bills that would have made substantive reforms to the use of solitary confinement in Maryland's facilities-HB 1001 / SB 1015 and HB 1564 / SB 659.  Unfortunately, neither bill passed this year, but we will continue our effort to curb this inhumane and ineffective practice in our state.

Unfortunately, the ACLU of Md also spent a great deal of time working to stave off regressive bills, such as HB 520/ SB 447, which would have prevented some inmates from earning good time credits-good time credits are a valuable incentive that gives incarcerated people hope for successful re-entry and incentivizes good behavior, thereby keeping our detention facilities safe. This bill failed.

We were not successful in opposing HB 1526 / SB 934, which passed.  This bill expands the definition of victim and expands victim notification elements for the purposes of parole, commutations, pardons, and sentence remissions. The result of this is that an indeterminate number of persons, who claim to have suffered or been threatened to suffer financial harm as a result of an offense, may disrupt the parole prospects for Marylanders who may be rehabilitated and ready to re-enter society.

d.    Reforming Penalties for Traffic Offenses

After two unsuccessful attempts in prior sessions, HB 1335 / SB 12 finally made it to final passage. This bill changes the law banning objects hanging from the rearview mirror from a primary offense to a secondary offense.  This means that Marylanders may no longer be subjected to traffic stops for this offense alone, although they can be penalized if they are stopped for another offense.

The ACLU of Md is also excited that HB 844 / SB 799 made it to final passage-this bill eliminates the jail penalty and reduces the monetary fine for driving on a suspended license for failure to pay child support. This bill demonstrates a common sense departure from carceral responses to child support. It is driven by an understanding that incarcerating someone is not helpful to either their children or their communities.

We were also successful in opposing HB 1079, which would have caused unnecessary interactions with law enforcement by allowing local jurisdictions to issue civil citations for jay walking.

e.    Life with Parole Sentences

This year, the ACLU ratcheted up our advocacy for HB 723 / SB 694, which would have removed the Governor from the parole process for persons sentenced to life with the possibility of parole. Maryland is one of only three states in which the Governor has to sign off on parole recommendations and, as a result, no lifer has been paroled in about a quarter of a century.  This year, the bill made it halfway, passing through the House of Delegates, but then stalled in the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee, where several fatal amendments threatened to undermine the effect of the bill.  Ultimately, we decided to walk away instead of passing a severely compromised bill.  We will regroup and strategize with our partners to get a strong bill passed in 2018.

As in past years, we also supported HB 401 / SB 196, which would have prohibited courts from sending children to prison for life without parole.  Unfortunately, this bill did not make it out of committee this year.

f.    Drug Policy Reform

The ACLU of Md worked on several bills this session to end the misguided "war on drugs," and to move substance use and substance use disorder from a criminal justice issue to a public health issue.
 
On cannabis policy reform, we supported HB 379 / SB 949 to expunge records of cannabis possession, which passed! We also successfully defeated efforts to re-criminalize the public use of cannabis and the use of cannabis in vehicles, the latter is already subject to criminal penalties.

The ACLU of Md also supported HB 1443 / SB 999, the Legislative Black Caucus' efforts to address the lack of racial equity in the medical cannabis business licensing process. Unfortunately, that bill failed at the last minute, when the House and Senate refused to come to an agreement over the details of the measure until just after midnight on Sine Die, when it was too late.

The ACLU of Md also supported a package of harm reduction bills specifically aimed at addressing opioid overdoses. The package included HB 519 (authorizing supervised injection facilities) and HB 488 (decriminalizing the minor possession of all drugs). While neither passed, they continued an important discussion about the failure of the war on drugs and the harm it has caused, especially for communities of color.

V.    IMMIGRANTS' RIGHTS

This session, we joined forces with our partners to support HB  1362/ SB 835 Maryland Law Enforcement and Governmental Trust Act.  As introduced, this legislation would have limited the use of Maryland's law enforcement and corrections resources in the enforcement of misguided draconian federal immigration enforcement efforts.  The bill would also have prohibited discriminatory registries and required state agencies to ensure that inquiries into immigration status are not made unnecessarily.  Finally, the bill would have required the Attorney General to issue guidance to public schools, courthouses, and hospitals regarding the enforcement of immigration laws on their premises.  An amended but strong version of this bill passed through the House of Delegates.  Unfortunately, the Senate Judicial Proceedings committee whittled the bill down to police training, narrow language limiting law enforcement's ability to make immigration status inquiries and a preamble citing U.S. Supreme Court cases.  Ultimately, the bill was recommitted to the Senate Judicial Proceedings committee, where it died.  We are working with our partners to strategize our efforts forward from this disheartening loss.

VI.    FAIR TREATMENT AND NON-DISCRIMINATION 

In a huge victory for fair treatment of all of Maryland's children, bills designed to put an end to harsh disciplinary practices for young learners and to analyze the effects of classroom removals on all students were passed.

The ACLU strongly supported SB 651/ HB 425 to curb the overuse of suspension and expulsion for pre-K through second grade students in public schools. It allows removal only in extreme circumstances, at the determination of the school administration in consultation with the appropriate behavioral or mental health staff. It also requires the use of research-based alternatives, including positive behavioral interventions and referrals to individualized education teams, responses that some schools are already successfully implementing.

In addition, we worked closely with legislators on a bill that forms a commission to study current discipline practices, analyze the relationship between disciplinary trends and the juvenile and criminal justice systems, and review national best practices on restorative practices. The ACLU is a member of the Commission of the School-to-Prison Pipeline & Restorative Practices, which will report its findings and recommendations to the Governor and General Assembly in January 2019.

This session, we also worked on several bills that sought to strengthen the anti-discrimination codes in schools and elsewhere.  One of the bills was HB 696 / SB 849, which sought to align the policies of private schools that receive taxpayer funded vouchers with the strong anti-discrimination code of Maryland's public schools. Currently, the language written into the budget authorizing the BOOST voucher program protects only several categories in the process of student admission, but offers no protections in student retention.  These bills sought to strengthen the code by adding more categories and extending the protections to student retention, which is provided for in public schools.  The bills, however, were held up in their respective committees.

Another bill, SB 557, sought to increase funding for the private school voucher program from its current level to include all students who attend a Maryland public school that ranks in the bottom 5 percent in statewide assessments.  The ACLU of Md strongly opposed this bill, which never made it out of committee.

This year, we again joined our partners in supporting HB 172/ SB 728 The Home Act.  This important legislation would have prohibited discrimination in the housing market based on the person's source of income.  Unfortunately, many persons who receive housing assistance (often in the form of a housing voucher), are discriminated against and are therefore unable to find appropriate housing for their families.  The bill passed the House of Delegates, but stalled in the Senate Judicial Proceedings committee.  Although this was a disappointing outcome, the bill made it further than it had in the past.  We will continue working with our partners to push it across the finish line.  

VII.    PRIVACY

This session, several bills were introduced to safeguard Marylanders' privacy rights, especially in the context of new and developing technologies.  Although none of these progressive bills passed, the introduction of positive rights-protective legislation signals recognition among our elected leaders that Marylanders must not be exposed to unwarranted privacy intrusions.  Some bills had been introduced in past years, such as HB 917 / SB 878, which would set parameters on the use of cell site simulators (stingrays) and HB 998, which would have required law enforcement to obtain a court order before seeking to access historical electronic device location information.

The ACLU also supported several newly-minted bills, such as HB 1065 to establish a Taskforce to Study Law Enforcement Surveillance Technologies and to make recommendations relating to the use of surveillance technology by law enforcement agencies in the State.  HB 1065 passed the House, but stalled in the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee.

HB 1148 would have set parameters on the use of facial recognition technology in the state. This technology is fraught with problems, including biases inherent in the technology itself and biases in the way it is deployed.  Unfortunately, HB 1148 did not make it out of the House Judiciary Committee, but we will renew our efforts to pass this bill in 2018.

At a very late hour, SB 1200-the Internet Consumer Privacy Rights Act of 2017-was introduced to prohibit Internet Service Providers from selling consumers' personal information or targeting consumers with advertising based on their browsing history.  This bill came in response to Congress overturning pre-existing FCC rules, which would have required ISPs to obtain affirmative permission from their customers before using, sharing, or selling their customers' private information.  The bill made it through the Senate, but was voted unfavorably by the House Economic Matters Committee.

Unfortunately, HB 370 / SB 354-Richard E. Israel and Roger "Pip" Moyer End-of-Life Option Act-again failed this year.  This bill would have would allowed individuals with terminal illnesses to request aid in dying.

VIII.    RE-ENTRY

This year, the ACLU proudly supported our partners in the passage of HB 860 / SB 853, the Maryland Equal Access to Food Act of 2017.  This important legislation repealed antiquated and misguided barriers that prevented persons who have been convicted of certain offenses from accessing temporary cash assistance (TCA) or food stamps.

As in past years, several bills were introduced to expand opportunities for expungement and shielding of criminal convictions, to allow Marylanders to access job, education, housing and other opportunities.  HB 836 passed, which expanded the list of convictions eligible for expungement to include common law battery.

We also supported HB 694 /SB 543, which sought to prohibit colleges from inquiring about a prospective student's criminal background during the initial college application.  Later in the process, the inquiry could be made, but a student should be given a first chance and not be denied the ability to receive an education solely due to their entanglement with the criminal justice system. The bill passed both chambers and currently awaits the Governor's approval.

This session, we again successfully opposed SB 408, which would have barred certain returning citizens from rental opportunities in senior apartment facilities.

IX.    POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY

The ACLU again renewed our efforts to fight for transparency in policing-HB 698 / SB 362 would have allowed Marylanders to learn how their complaints of police misconduct are handled.  It is unacceptable that victims of police abuse have no way of knowing whether or how well their complaints were investigated-whether witnesses were contacted or if officers were questioned.  Without this basic transparency, it is virtually impossible for communities to hold their officers accountable.   Unfortunately, the bill did not make it out of committee this year, but we will continue to fight for its passage in 2018.

Another important bill, HB 1504, would have given the residents of Baltimore City the full range of control over the Baltimore City Police Department that residents of other jurisdictions have over their departments.  Under an antiquated law still on the books, the Baltimore City Police Department is an agency and instrumentality of the state of Maryland.  Unfortunately, the sponsor withdrew the bill before it could even benefit from a committee hearing.

We again supported several police reporting bills.  HB 50 would have reinstated the pre-existing reporting requirement on the use of electronic control devices (tasers) and HB 1342 would have expanded the existing reporting requirement for deaths in police custody to include deaths that occur in correctional facilities.  Both bills were vehemently opposed by law enforcement and correctional agencies and did not pass.

Two bills were introduced to curb the use of harmful police tactics.  HB 181 would have required the newly reconstituted Maryland Police Training and Standards Commission (MPTSC) to issue guidance on the use of electronic control devices (tasers).  This bill passed the House but was stalled in the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee.  Thankfully, HB 739 / SB 941 did make it to full passage-this bill requires MPTSC to set training and deployment standards for SWAT teams and law enforcement officers who conduct no-knock warrant service.

A flurry of bills was introduced to enhance criminal penalties for offenses against law enforcement officers-these bills are unnecessary because law enforcement already receive heightened protection in our criminal statute.  More importantly, these proposals threaten to make the work of law enforcement even more dangerous by instigating and exacerbating distrust between officers and Maryland's communities. Fortunately, none of these bills passed.

X.    REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM

As in previous years, several bills were introduced to limit women's access to abortion. HB 547 would have prohibited abortions after 20 weeks. HB 1167 / SB 841 would have prevented dilation and evacuation abortions (also known as "D&E abortions"), the safest and most common method of second-trimester abortion. Thankfully, however, none of these bills passed this year.

Additionally, Marylanders' ability to make their own family planning choices were greatly improved with the passage of HB 613 / SB 363 (allowing pharmacists to prescribe and dispense contraceptives); HB 616 / SB 232 (allowing students to be lawfully absent due to pregnancy and parenting-related needs); and HB 1083 / SB 1081 (ensuring the funding of family planning services, such as Planned Parenthood, in case of a withdrawal of federal funds).

XI.    VOTING RIGHTS AND FAIR ELECTIONS

Several bills were introduced during the 2017 legislative session to improve Marylanders' ability to exercise their voting rights. HB 353 was successfully passed and will require voters to be notified when certain changes are made to voting policy, such as voter registration, provisional voting, absentee voting, or the location of a polling place or early voting center. Other measures to improve access to voting, such as Automatic Voter Registration (HB 741 / SB 938) and Election Day Registration (HB 345 / SB 423) were seriously considered, but unfortunately failed to pass.

Several regressive measures (HB 532 / SB 1133, HB 539, and HB 1354 / SB 842) were introduced to create burdensome and unnecessary voter ID requirements. Thankfully, they all failed.

XI.    WORKPLACE FAIRNESS

This session saw a huge victory for workplace fairness when HB 1 / SB 230 was passed. The measure will allow Maryland workers to earn paid sick leave, so they no longer have to make the impossible choice between caring for their health or the health of a family member and their job security. That legislation now awaits Governor Hogan's approval.

XIII.    YOUTH JUSTICE

Several bills were introduced, unsuccessfully, this session to address youth entangled in the criminal justice system.  HB 471 / SB 215 would have reformed the adjudication of youth in adult court. A bill to limit the use of shackling when transporting youth, which can often be re-traumatizing, was given unfavorable reports by the House Judiciary and Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee, despite recommendations from the youth justice task force created by these same committees last year to study the issue. Instead, a bill was approved requiring the Department of Juvenile Services to report on the progress in the implementation of those recommendations (HB 1256 / SB 982).

XIV. EDUCATION REFORM

After cutting education funding in prior years, this year, Governor Hogan funded the education formula according to current law, which directs an increase of 1.3 percent over the previous year. Some school districts received more funding due to increases in student enrollment, while other districts lost funding due to shrinking enrollment or changes in county wealth.

a.    Baltimore City Schools

Just a few days into the 2017 Legislative Session, news broke of an estimated $130 million budget deficit for Baltimore City Schools. The ACLU of Md and coalition allies sprung into action to organize parents, students, teachers, and community members to compel Gov. Hogan, Mayor Pugh and the General Assembly to #FixtheGap. As a result, a "Bridge to Kirwan" funding package - state legislation along with commitments from Baltimore City - will restore about $60 million to City Schools.

b.    School Funding - Short and Long Term

As part of the state's portion of "Bridge to Kirwan," the legislature approved State Grants to Education Aid, which provides $28.2 million in grants to 11 school districts with declining enrollment or with full-day prekindergarten. Bills that relieve Baltimore of certain spending mandates were also approved. 

The state's consultant to the "Kirwan" Commission on Innovation and Excellence in Education recommended that an additional $2.9 billion is needed for Maryland school districts to be adequately funded-$1.9 billion from the state and $1 billion from local governments. For example, Baltimore City and Prince George's, far below adequacy under the current formula, were judged by the consultants to need an additional $358 million and  $600 million respectively. The Commission will review the consultant's report on education funding and make its recommendations by Dec. 2017. The ACLU of Md is now preparing for the next legislative session, where we will advocate for an updated formula to bring all districts to the state's constitutional standard.

c. Funding for Full-Day Pre-kindergarten

The ACLU is a strong proponent of fully funding full-day pre-K in the per-pupil funding formula, which was also supported by the state's Kirwan Commission consultants. Full-day programs benefit children, but as the state provides only partial funding for half-day, full-day programs can stress the budget.

An amendment was added to the "Bridge to Kirwan" funding package to phase in over three years the equivalent of funding for the remaining half-day per pupil for systems in which all of the pre-K programs are full-day. This funding both reimburses the current four counties that have all-day pre-K and could incentivize other districts to implement full-day programs.

Date

Featured image

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Show related content

Tweet Text

Type

Menu parent dynamic listing

Show PDF in viewer on page

Style

• Read more about 2017 General Assembly Report

ACLU of Maryland 2016 General Assembly Report 

Date

Featured image

Show featured image

Hide banner image

Show related content

Tweet Text

Type

Menu parent dynamic listing

Show PDF in viewer on page

Style

Show list numbers

• Read more about 2016 General Assembly Report