ReportWire

Tag: Delaware state government

  • Democratic primary for governor highlights Tuesday’s elections in Delaware

    Democratic primary for governor highlights Tuesday’s elections in Delaware

    [ad_1]

    DOVER, Del. (AP) — A Democratic gubernatorial contest pitting Delaware’s lieutenant governor against the chief executive of the state’s largest county is the marquee race in Tuesday’s primary elections.

    Lt. Gov. Bethany Hall-Long, who has held public office since winning a state House seat in 2002, is hoping to overcome a campaign finance scandal and succeed Democrat John Carney as governor.

    Hall-Long has been endorsed by Carney and Delaware’s Democrat Party establishment. But the two-term lieutenant governor is facing a tough primary challenge from New Castle County Executive Matt Meyer. Former state environmental secretary Collin O’Mara also is seeking the Democratic nomination, but he has been overshadowed by the other two candidates.

    Meyer has raised substantially more money than Hall-Long this year, and his current campaign balance is about seven times higher than hers.

    Hall-Long reported raising about $582,000 this year, including roughly $52,200 in the three-week reporting period that ended Tuesday. She reported spending $1.18 million, including $182,000 in the three-week period.

    Meyer has raised about $1 million this year, including about $200,000 in the past three weeks. He has spent about $2.1 million, including roughly $1.2 million in the three-week sprint toward Tuesday’s primary.

    On the Republican side, House Minority Leader Michael Ramone is favored to win a three-way GOP primary for governor.

    Meanwhile, Carney, who is prohibited by law from seeking a third term as governor, has taken a step down on the political ladder and is eyeing the Democratic nomination for mayor of Wilmington, Delaware’s largest city. His opponent is former Wilmington city treasurer Velda Jones-Potter, who was also appointed to a two-year stint as state treasurer after then-treasurer Jack Markell defeated Carney in a 2008 primary and was elected governor.

    As of Friday, more than 24,000 Delawareans, including more than 17,500 Democrats, had already cast their votes in the primary, either by absentee ballot or in-person early voting at designated sites in each county.

    Other races of note on Tuesday include three-way Democratic primaries to succeed Hall-Long as lieutenant governor and Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester as Delaware’s lone representative in the U.S. House. Rochester is seeking the U.S. Senate seat currently held by fellow Democrat Tom Carper, who endorsed her in announcing his retirement last year.

    Elsewhere, former state auditor Kathleen McGuiness is in a three-way Democratic primary for a state House seat held by retiring former speaker Pete Schwartzkopf. Schwartzkopf, a longtime McGuiness ally, has endorsed her to succeed him in representing the Rehoboth Beach area.

    McGuiness was convicted in 2022 on misdemeanor charges of conflict of interest, official misconduct and noncompliance with state procurement rules. A jury acquitted her on felony charges of theft and witness intimidation.

    After the trial, the judge threw out the procurement conviction. Delaware’s Supreme Court later vacated the official misconduct conviction but upheld the conflict-of-interest verdict, which involved the hiring of McGuiness’ daughter as a part-time employee in the auditor’s office.

    The trial marked the first time in Delaware history that a sitting statewide elected official was convicted on criminal charges, but the misdemeanor conviction does not prohibit McGuiness from holding public office.

    What to know about the 2024 Election

    McGuiness was prosecuted by Attorney General Kathleen Jennings, a fellow Democrat. In contrast, Jennings has refused to prosecute Hall-Long for campaign finance violations that led several top staffers to abandon her campaign and prompted election officials to commission a forensic audit.

    The audit found that during seven years as campaign treasurer for his wife, Dana Long wrote 112 checks to himself or cash, and one to his wife. The checks totaled just under $300,000 and should have been reported as campaign expenditures. Instead, 109 were not disclosed in finance reports, and the other four, payable to Dana Long, were reported as being written to someone else.

    The audit also found that Hall-Long and her husband had received payments totaling $33,000 more than what she purportedly loaned her campaign over several years, while not disclosing those loans on campaign finance reports.

    Hall-Long has disputed the audit’s findings and described the reporting violations as simple bookkeeping mistakes.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Turmoil in courts on gun laws in wake of justices’ ruling

    Turmoil in courts on gun laws in wake of justices’ ruling

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON (AP) — A landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision on the Second Amendment is upending gun laws across the country, dividing judges and sowing confusion over what firearm restrictions can remain on the books.

    The high court’s ruling that set new standards for evaluating gun laws left open many questions, experts say, resulting in an increasing number of conflicting decisions as lower court judges struggle to figure out how to apply it.

    The Supreme Court’s so-called Bruen decision changed the test that lower courts had long used for evaluating challenges to firearm restrictions. Judges should no longer consider whether the law serves public interests like enhancing public safety, the justices said.

    Under the Supreme Court’s new test, the government that wants to uphold a gun restriction must look back into history to show it is consistent with the country’s “historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

    Courts in recent months have declared unconstitutional federal laws designed to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers,felony defendants and people who use marijuana. Judges have shot down a federal ban on possessing guns with serial numbers removed and gun restrictions for young adults in Texas and have blocked the enforcement of Delaware’s ban on the possession of homemade “ghost guns.”

    In several instances, judges looking at the same laws have come down on opposite sides on whether they are constitutional in the wake of the conservative Supreme Court majority’s ruling. The legal turmoil caused by the first major gun ruling in a decade will likely force the Supreme Court to step in again soon to provide more guidance for judges.

    “There’s confusion and disarray in the lower courts because not only are they not reaching the same conclusions, they’re just applying different methods or applying Bruen’s method differently,” said Jacob Charles, a professor at Pepperdine University’s law school who focuses on firearms law.

    “What it means is that not only are new laws being struck down … but also laws that have been on the books for over 60 years, 40 years in some cases, those are being struck down — where prior to Bruen — courts were unanimous that those were constitutional,” he said.

    The legal wrangling is playing out as mass shootings continue to plague the country awash in guns and as law enforcement officials across the U.S. work to combat an uptick in violent crime.

    This week, six people were fatally shot at multiple locations in a small town in rural Mississippi and a gunman killed three students and critically wounded five others at Michigan State University before killing himself.

    Dozens of people have died in mass shootings so far in 2023, including in California, where 11 people were killed as they welcomed the Lunar New Year at a dance hall popular with older Asian Americans. Last year, more than 600 mass shootings occurred in the U.S. in which at least four people were killed or wounded, according to the Gun Violence Archive.

    The decision opened the door to a wave of legal challenges from gun-rights activists who saw an opportunity to undo laws on everything from age limits to AR-15-style semi-automatic weapons. For gun rights supporters, the Bruen decision was a welcome development that removed what they see as unconstitutional restraints on Second Amendment rights.

    “It’s a true reading of what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights tells us,” said Mark Oliva, a spokesman for the National Shooting Sports Foundation. “It absolutely does provide clarity to the lower courts on how the constitution should be applied when it comes to our fundamental rights.”

    Gun control groups are raising alarm after a federal appeals court this month said that under the Supreme Court’s new standards, the government can’t stop people who have domestic violence restraining orders against them from owning guns.

    The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals acknowledged that the law “embodies salutary policy goals meant to protect vulnerable people in our society.” But the judges concluded that the government failed to point to a precursor from early American history that is comparable enough to the modern law. Attorney General Merrick Garland has said the government will seek further review of that decision.

    Gun control activists have decried the Supreme Court’s historical test, but say they remain confident that many gun restrictions will survive challenges. Since the decision, for example, judges have consistently upheld the federal ban on convicted felons from possessing guns.

    The Supreme Court noted that cases dealing with “unprecedented societal concerns or dramatic technological changes may require a more nuanced approach.” And the justices clearly emphasized that the right to bear arms is limited to law-abiding citizens, said Shira Feldman, litigation counsel for Brady, the gun control group.

    The Supreme Court’s test has raised questions about whether judges are suited to be poring over history and whether it makes sense to judge modern laws based on regulations — or a lack thereof— from the past.

    “We are not experts in what white, wealthy, and male property owners thought about firearms regulation in 1791. Yet we are now expected to play historian in the name of constitutional adjudication,” wrote Mississippi U.S. District Judge Carlton Reeves, who was appointed by President Barack Obama.

    Some judges are “really parsing the history very closely and saying ‘these laws aren’t analogous because the historical law worked in a slightly different fashion than the modern law’,” said Andrew Willinger, executive director of the Duke Center for Firearms Law.

    Others, he said, “have done a much more flexible inquiry and are trying to say ‘look, what is the purpose of this historical law as best I can understand it?’”

    Firearm rights and gun control groups are closely watching many pending cases, including several challenging state laws banning certain semi-automatic weapons and high-capacity magazines.

    A federal judge in Chicago on Friday denied a bid to block an Illinois law that bans the sale of so-called assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, finding the law to be constitutional under the Supreme Court’s new test. A state court, however, already has partially blocked the law — allowing some gun dealers to continue selling the weapons — amid a separate legal challenge.

    Already, some gun laws passed in the wake of the Supreme Court decision have been shot down. A judge declared multiple portions of New York’s new gun law unconstitutional, including rules that restrict carrying firearms in public parks and places of worship. An appeals court later put that ruling on hold while it considers the case. And the Supreme Court has allowed New York to enforce the law for now.

    Some judges have upheld a law banning people under indictment for felonies from buying guns while others have declared it unconstitutional.

    A federal judge issued an order barring Delaware from enforcing provisions of a new law outlawing the manufacture and possession of so-called “ghost guns” that don’t have serial numbers and can be nearly impossible for law enforcement officials to trace. But another judge rejected a challenge to California’s “ghost gun” regulations.

    In the California case, U.S. District Judge George Wu, who was nominated by President George W. Bush, appeared to take a dig at how other judges are interpreting the Supreme Court’s guidance.

    The company that brought the challenge —“and apparently certain other courts” — would like to treat the Supreme Court’s decision “as a ‘word salad,’ choosing an ingredient from one side of the ‘plate’ and an entirely-separate ingredient from the other, until there is nothing left whatsoever other than an entirely-bulletproof and unrestrained Second Amendment,” Wu wrote in his ruling.

    ____

    Richer reported from Boston.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden called gay marriage ‘inevitable’ and soon it’ll be law

    Biden called gay marriage ‘inevitable’ and soon it’ll be law

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — A decade ago, then-Vice President Joe Biden shocked the political world and preempted his boss by suddenly declaring his support for gay marriage — one of the country’s most contentious issues — on national television. But not everyone was surprised.

    A small group had attended a private fundraiser with Biden weeks earlier in Los Angeles where he disclosed not only his approval but his firm conclusion about the future of same-sex marriage.

    He predicted, “Things are changing so rapidly, it’s going to become a political liability in the near term for someone to say, ‘I oppose gay marriage.’”

    “Mark my words. And my job — our job — is to keep this momentum rolling to the inevitable.”

    The day that Biden envisioned may have arrived. He plans on Tuesday to sign legislation, passed by bipartisan majorities in Congress, to protect gay unions — even if the Supreme Court should revisit, as some fear or hope, its ruling supporting a nationwide right of same-sex couples to marry.

    Biden’s signature will burnish his legacy as a champion of equality at a time when the LGBTQ community is anxious to safeguard legal changes from a backlash on the right that has used incendiary rhetoric, particularly against transgender people.

    “It is a historic moment and a long time coming,” said Bruce Reed, the White House deputy chief of staff and a longtime adviser to Biden. “It’s all the more inspiring in light of what the country has been put through in recent years, and what courts have threatened of late.”

    If there’s a feeling of anticlimax, it’s because the politics of marriage have shifted as dramatically as Biden predicted. Although the issue is not universally embraced — a majority of Republicans in the House and Senate voted against the legislation — it’s no longer considered a dangerous third rail.

    ———

    That wasn’t the case a decade ago.

    Chad Griffin, who led the American Foundation for Equal Rights and the Human Rights Campaign, said it was common for lawmakers to tell him, “You know privately I’m with you, and you know so-and-so in my family is gay or lesbian, but politically, I can’t be out there.”

    Activists’ frustration extended to President Barack Obama. He had made some changes, such as eliminating the “don’t ask, don’t tell” rule that prevented gay people from serving openly in the military, but had stopped short of embracing marriage equality despite lawsuits that were forcing the issue to the forefront.

    As Obama’s vice president, Biden shared the same stance. In 1996, he had voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, which prevented federal recognition of same-sex unions.

    In April 2012, Biden attended the fundraiser at the Los Angeles home of a married gay couple — Michael Lombardo, an HBO executive, and Sonny Ward, an architect — and their children. When it was time for the question-and-answer session, Griffin decided he shouldn’t sidestep the issue.

    “When you came in tonight, you met Michael and Sonny and their two beautiful kids,” he said to Biden. “And I wonder if you can just sort of talk in a frank, honest way about your own personal views as it relates to marriage equality.”

    Biden responded as Griffin had requested — frankly and personally.

    “All you got to do is look in the eyes of those kids,” he said. “And no one can wonder, no one can wonder whether or not they are cared for and nurtured and loved and reinforced. And folks, what’s happening is, everybody is beginning to see it.”

    Just over two weeks later, Biden was on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” and host David Gregory asked whether he supported gay marriage. Biden said the issue came down to “a simple proposition.”

    “Who do you love? And will you be loyal to the person you love?” Biden said. “And that’s what people are finding out is what all marriages, at their root, are about, whether they’re marriages of lesbians, or gay men, or heterosexuals.”

    Biden said the president, not him, “sets the policies.” But he said gay couples should have “all the civil rights, all the civil liberties.”

    Gautam Raghavan was leading LGBTQ outreach for the White House at the time. On the Sunday that the interview aired, he and his husband were hosting some friends for brunch, and the TV was on in the background.

    “We were watching it and thinking, ‘Oh my God, I can’t believe that just happened,’” Raghavan said. He can’t remember what they ate that morning, but “I’m sure we had a mimosa afterward.”

    It was an unusually unscripted moment in carefully choreographed Washington.

    For Biden, “all politics is personal,” said Reed, who was Biden’s chief of staff in the vice president’s office. “And I think that’s what prompted him to speak his mind.”

    Not everyone was pleased. Obama was left trailing a step behind his vice president, and three days later did an interview to disclose his own support for gay marriage. He said Biden had gotten “a little over his skis” but there were no hard feelings.

    ———

    At the time of Biden’s interview, Jim Obergefell was living in Ohio with his partner, John Arthur, who had recently been diagnosed with the deadly disease known as Lou Gehrig’s disease, or ALS.

    Marriage was always considered out of the question, Obergefell said, but Biden’s comments caught his attention. The following year, after the Supreme Court ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act was unconstitutional, Obergefell proposed to Arthur.

    They married in Maryland, where it was legal, but their home state of Ohio would not recognize their union. Although Arthur died in 2013, their legal battle continued to the Supreme Court. Obergefell met Biden for the first time in 2015.

    “I just remember walking up to him and he hugged me and the first words out of his mouth were condolences for the loss of my husband,” he said.

    The Supreme Court soon legalized gay marriage nationwide in a decision known as Obergefell v. Hodges.

    Although the issue was widely considered to be settled, it resurfaced last June when the court’s conservative majority overturned Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion in 1973. In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the court “should reconsider” other precedents as well, including the Obergefell ruling, raising concern that other civil rights could be rolled back.

    Legislation to revive the right to abortion was politically impossible. But marriage might be a different matter, and supporters believed they could rally enough Republican votes to sidestep a filibuster in the Senate. They were right.

    Obergefell, however, is not experiencing a sense of satisfaction.

    “Our right to marry was affirmed by the Supreme Court. And in a perfect world, we would never have to worry about losing that,” he said. “We now know that rights that people counted on and expected are no longer safe.”

    Instead of feeling happy, he said, “I’m on edge.”

    ———

    It’s a common sentiment right now in the face of political attacks over LGBTQ issues.

    Gov. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., signed legislation limiting teachers’ ability to talk about sexual orientation or gender identity in schools. In Texas, GOP Gov. Greg Abbott wants state child welfare investigators to consider gender-affirming care as a form of abuse.

    Protesters, sometimes armed, have shown up at events where drag queens read to children. Five people were shot to death at a gay club in Colorado last month. The suspect has been charged with hate crimes.

    “The story of civil rights in America is always evolving,” said Raghavan, who now runs the White House personnel office. “We should never assume that we’re done with something because we got a good court decision or a piece of legislation.”

    Biden has taken steps to safeguard rights for transgender people, such as reinstating anti-discrimination provisions eliminated by President Donald Trump. Biden also ended the ban on transgender people serving in the military. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg is the first openly gay Cabinet member, and Biden’s assistant health secretary, Rachel Levine, is the first transgender person to win Senate confirmation to an executive post.

    Sarah McBride, a transgender state senator from Biden’s home state of Delaware, said it’s a comfort “for so many of us, who feel frightened or vulnerable or alone, to know that the leader of this country, the leader of the free world, not only sees us but embraces us.”

    McBride worked for Biden’s eldest son, Beau, during his campaigns for Delaware attorney general, and she came out as transgender in 2012.

    Before Beau Biden died from brain cancer in 2015, he helped pass Delaware laws that legalized gay marriage and banned discrimination over gender identity. McBride said the experience deepened the elder Biden’s own commitment to these issues and “he’s carrying on Beau’s legacy.”

    As last month’s midterm elections approached, the White House played host to Dylan Mulvaney, a Broadway performer who has chronicled her gender transition on TikTok, to talk about transgender issues with Biden.

    Conservative critics were apoplectic. Ben Shapiro, a popular commentator, called the interview “maybe the most disturbing clip in presidential history.”

    But Biden, much like he has in the past, suggested that acceptance was possible — maybe even likely. Asked by Mulvaney how leaders can better advocate for transgender people, Biden responded that it was important to be “seen with people like you.”

    “People fear what they don’t know. They fear what they don’t know,” he said. “And when people realize, individuals realize, ‘Oh, this is what they’re telling me to be frightened of, this is the problem.’ I mean, people change their minds.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link