Tag: New Jersey state government

Jersey Shore towns say state’s marijuana law handcuffs police and emboldens rowdy teens

[ad_1]

OCEAN CITY, N.J. (AP) — It’s summer on the Jersey Shore. For many young people, that means one thing: Party time!

But officials and residents of several beachside towns say New Jersey’s criminal justice reforms in recent years — such as decriminalizing marijuana use — are having an unintended effect, emboldening large groups of teenagers to run amok on beaches and boardwalks, knowing there’s little chance they’ll get in trouble for it.

Now, some lawmakers are trying to walk back parts of those laws, which also involve alcohol use and possession. The laws were designed to keep more juveniles out of the court system, and imposed a number of restrictions on police officers’ interactions with them.

A company planning a wind farm off the coast of New Jersey says it wants government financial incentives like the tax break lawmakers are giving a Danish developer.

The CEO of United Airlines is apologizing for jumping on a private plane this week while thousands of his airline’s customers were stranded because their flights got canceled.

A bill to extend internet gambling in New Jersey for another five years is in the hands of Gov. Phil Murphy following its approval by the state Legislature.

A bill to let Danish offshore wind energy developer Orsted keep tax credits that it otherwise would have to return to New Jersey ratepayers was approved by the slimmest of margins in the state Legislature Friday afternoon.

“You don’t want to see a kid with a record that will last the rest of his life, but you can’t let them believe they can do anything they want,” said Mayor Anthony Vaz of Seaside Heights. “That’s unacceptable.”

During Memorial Day weekend, police and media outlets reported episodes of underage drinking, drug use, fights and assaults in Ocean City and Seaside Heights — home to the infamous MTV series “Jersey Shore” in which a bunch of summer renters generally raised hell in town.

Although teens have been drinking and smoking marijuana at the Jersey Shore for generations, long before the state altered its laws, some elected officials and residents say the situation has drastically worsened in the last two years.

Over Memorial Day, teens were hanging from a motel balcony in Seaside Heights and climbing onto the roof of another motel. In Ocean City, eight teens drank themselves unconscious on the boardwalk and had to be hospitalized. Restroom attendants were assaulted and spit on by youths. Several teens were carrying knives and one had a replica gun that police say looked just like the real thing.

“Enough is enough,” Ocean City Mayor Jay Gillian wrote in a message to residents on the city’s website. “It’s become clear over the past two summers that these crowds will only grow larger and unrulier unless something changes.”

Holly Kisby, an Ocean City resident who has worked on the boardwalk for over 30 years, said teens were drinking, smoking marijuana, setting off fireworks into the crowd, fighting, destroying property and stealing from stores, among other things.

“You’re getting well more than 300 kids, if I had to guess, 700-plus a few nights, all acting wild,” she said. “Like a bad house party without the house. This is by far the worst it’s ever been.”

Ocean City Police Chief Jay Prettyman said most of the troublemakers were drinking underage, but added that New Jersey’s recently adopted cannabis law says that someone under the age of 21 cannot consent to a police search for marijuana or alcohol.

Previously, teens caught with those things could be arrested. Now, they get a warning, or get taken to police headquarters for a parent or guardian to pick them up except in the most serious situations.

Word spread fast among teens, who know they don’t have to give officers their names as long as they don’t walk away from the officer during questioning. The kids even know that officers themselves could face charges if they violate the rights of teens in these circumstances.

The New Jersey Attorney General’s Office did not respond to requests for comment. The American Civil Liberties Union supported the changes, saying teens should be offered alternatives to criminal prosecution where possible.

Above the Seaside Heights boardwalk Thursday, a small plane towed a banner asking, “Do you know the signs of alcohol poisoning?” Sitting on a bench with friends, 22-year-old Santiago Caceres said police should not be able to search people for illicit substances.

“People of color are way more likely to be searched than white people,” he said. “People are in jail because of this.”

“A lot of underage people make a dumb mistake and they get a criminal record,” ruining the rest of their life, added his friend Angel Aguero, 23. Both had come down to the beach from West New York, a town in New Jersey just across from Manhattan.

Nick DiMattina, a 15-year-old from Beachwood, New Jersey, said police should be allowed to conduct searches of underage people like himself. He learned of the change in the law on TikTok.

“If kids are allowed to do it and don’t get searched, then they’re going to do it,” said DiMattina, who said he does not drink or use cannabis.

Several lawmakers from both parties have introduced bills reinstating fines for underage possession of alcohol and marijuana, and allowing police officers to search teens observed to be in possession of the items.

Prettyman, the Ocean City police chief, said officers throughout the state are hesitant to engage teens regarding alcohol or marijuana for fear of being charged themselves with a third-degree crime of depriving the teens of their rights. He said bills removing that provision, and reinstating penalties for underage possession and consumption of alcohol and pot, will help undo some of the excesses of the current law.

Sen. Michael Testa, a Republican, was shocked by the “lawlessness” on the Jersey Shore over Memorial Day weekend. He’s sponsoring a package of bills including one that would remove the threat of charges against police officers acting in good faith, and another allowing towns to designate alcohol and marijuana-free zones.

New Jersey is not alone in reforming its laws to try to keep more juveniles out of the criminal justice system. Several Maryland law enforcement officers say that state’s juvenile reforms have made it harder to question and investigate teens suspected of committing crimes, although the state’s Department of Juvenile Services says the laws are having a positive effect.

Seaside Heights’ mayor said he heard kids as young as 13 mouthing off to police officers, with impunity.

“A few of them actually said, ‘You can’t do anything to me,’” Vaz said. “I heard it with my own ears.”

The town is considering raising the minimum age to rent a motel room from 18 to 21 if disturbances continue.

In the aftermath of its own unruly weekend, Ocean City acted quickly to regain control of its beach and boardwalk, closing access to the beach at 8 p.m. and banning backpacks on the boardwalk after that hour; adopting an earlier curfew, and closing public restrooms at 10 p.m. Seaside Heights adopted similar measures, including one that allows officials to shut down the beach and boardwalk if things get out of hand, and other shore towns have enacted curfews and alcohol bans.

___

Follow Wayne Parry on Twitter at www.twitter.com/WayneParryAC

[ad_2]

Source link

July 4, 2023
Some Democratic-led states seek to bolster voter protections

[ad_1]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Lawmakers in several Democratic-controlled states are advocating sweeping voter protections this year, reacting to what they view as a broad undermining of voting rights by the Supreme Court and Republican-led states as well as a failed effort in Congress to bolster access to the polls.

Legislators in Connecticut, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey and New Mexico have introduced voting rights measures, while Michigan’s secretary of state is preparing a plan.

Among other things, the proposals would require state approval for local governments to change redistricting or voting procedures, ban voter suppression and intimidation, mandate that ballots are printed in more languages, increase protections for voters with disabilities, ensure the right to vote for those with previous felony convictions and instruct judges to prioritize voter access when hearing election-related challenges.

The measures are taking a much wider approach than legislation targeting a single aspect of voting or elections law. They seek to implement on a statewide basis many of the protections under the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, a law that many Democrats and voting rights groups say is being stripped of its most important elements.

If the legislation is enacted, the states would join California, New York, Oregon, Washington and Virginia in having comprehensive voting rights laws.

“It’s up to states now to ensure that the right to vote is protected,” said Janai Nelson, president of the the NAACP Legal Defense Fund.

Maryland’s proposal includes a requirement for local voting changes to receive preapproval, mirroring core provisions of the federal law that was struck down by the Supreme Court a decade ago.

Maryland was not among the states, mostly in the South, that was covered under the provision known as preclearance before the court ended it. But lawmakers there saw it as important because of persistent concerns over how districts for local governing bodies have been drawn, said Morgan Drayton, policy and engagement manager at Common Cause Maryland.

“A lot of our maps here are drawn behind closed doors, and there’s not a lot of input from the public that’s able to be given,” she said. “So this would do a lot to make these processes more transparent.”

In Maryland’s Baltimore County, a lawsuit claimed the county council’s map packed most Black voters into a single district. The state legislation would require jurisdictions in Maryland with a history of voter discrimination to have redistricting and election changes cleared by the state attorney general.

Democratic state Del. Stephanie Smith, a co-sponsor of the legislation, said that despite Maryland’s racial diversity and history of diversity in its political leadership, “access to the ballot and equitable representation is uneven.”

“This bill strengthens our commitment to voting access and protections at a time of great stress on our democratic institutions,” she said.

Proposals in Michigan and New Mexico address harassment against election workers and voters, especially those in minority communities. One of several bills in New Mexico would protect election officials, from the secretary of state to county and municipal elections clerks, from intimidation. That would be defined as inducing or attempting to induce fear, and a violation would be punishable as a fourth-degree felony punishable by up to 18 months in prison.

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, said she will seek similar protections for voters, including prohibiting firearms within a certain distance of polling places.

“We need an explicit ban on voter suppression and intimidation,” she said.

Connecticut’s legislation would expand language assistance for voters who speak, read or understand languages other than English. Language assistance is covered under the federal law, but only specifies protections for Spanish-speakers and for Asian, Native American and Alaska Native language minorities.

Ballots offered in Arabic, Haitian Creole and other languages also are needed, said Steven Lance, policy counsel at the national NAACP Legal Defense Fund.

A language would be covered if the group speaking it is more than 2% of the citizens of voting age in a particular municipality or the group includes more than 4,000 citizens of voting age, under Connecticut’s legislative proposal.

Residents also would have the right to ask the secretary of state to review whether a certain language should be covered, Lance said.

In New Jersey, advocacy organizations are pushing to expand voting rights legislation to include more groups that would be specifically protected from discrimination, including the state’s sizable Arab American population.

“A reality is the federal VRA was originally crafted in 1965, and while there have been other bills in the decade since, the VRA doesn’t reflect the diversity of the population of New Jersey in 2023,” said Henal Patel, law & policy director at the New Jersey Institute for Social Justice.

Some state voting rights bills also seek to create databases for information that has not always been readily available, such as polling place locations, voting rules and redistricting maps. The bills also would specify that state judges interpret voting laws in a way that ensures people maintain their right to vote.

Democrats in Minnesota are pushing numerous voting changes, including restoring voting rights to felons as soon as they are released from prison, allowing 16- and 17-year-olds to preregister so they are ready to vote as soon as they turn 18 and automatically registering people to vote when they obtain or renew their driver’s licenses.

Passing state voting rights legislation is only half the battle, said state Sen. Jennifer McClellan, a Virginia Democrat who introduced a state voting rights act that passed in 2021 when Democrats controlled both houses of the Legislature and the governor’s office.

McClellan noted that ensuring voting rights historically was a bipartisan issue, but said Republicans are now focused on “fighting phantom voter fraud” — making this year’s Virginia legislative elections all the more important.

“The entire General Assembly is up for election this year, and I think that’s going to be a big theme in the election — that if we want to protect our progress on voting rights, we’re going to need to make sure that Democrats keep the Senate and regain the majority in the House,” McClellan said.

McClellan won a special election this past week to fill an open seat in the U.S. House, where she will make history as the first Black woman to represent the state in Congress.

___

Associated Press coverage of race and voting receives support from the Jonathan Logan Family Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

[ad_2]

Source link

February 25, 2023
Divided appeals court rejects 4 insider trading convictions

[ad_1]

NEW YORK — A divided appeals court on Tuesday rejected the insider trading convictions of four men, including an ex-government employee turned consultant, prompting a sharp dissent from a judge who says the ruling may prompt insiders to sell confidential government information to the highest bidders.

The decision of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals came in a case in which a Washington consultant, David Blaszczak, was charged with converting government secrets into hedge fund profits.

In 2018, a jury convicted Blaszczak and three hedge fund employees in a scheme prosecutors said enabled the hedge fund workers to make over $3.5 million illegally for their company from 2012 through 2014. The Securities and Exchange Commission said the profits reached $3.9 million.

Before becoming a consultant, Blaszczak worked at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

The SEC and prosecutors said he boasted about access to government information about the timing and content of planned changes to reimbursement rules affecting publicly traded health care-related companies.

In a 2-to-1 decision Tuesday, the 2nd Circuit said it was reversing its prior affirmance of the convictions after the U.S. Supreme Court urged further consideration to consider its reversal of convictions of officials in the administration of former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

In that case, the Supreme Court concluded that politically motivated conduct by the officials to cause significant traffic gridlock for several days at the New Jersey entrance to the George Washington Bridge linking New Jersey and Manhattan was not a crime because they did not aim to deprive the bridge’s owners of money or property.

In the Blaszczak case, defense lawyers argued that their client’s information did not constitute property or a thing of value within the meaning of criminal laws pertaining to fraud and insider trading. Their argument, as it related to most counts, was supported by prosecutors in the most recent appeal.

The 2nd Circuit agreed to reverse the majority of convictions and vacated convictions on two other counts, leaving it to a lower court to decide whether a retrial on those counts will occur.

In a dissent, Circuit Judge Richard A. Sullivan blasted the ruling. He wrote that it “effectively permits sophisticated insiders to leverage their access to confidential government information and sell it to the highest bidders — in this case, hedge funds that used the confidential information to make millions shorting the stocks of public companies affected by CMS’s regulations.”

He said the ruling also “threatens to upend decades of settled precedent concerning frauds premised on the theft of intangible property and suggests — in what amounts to dicta — a curious and troubling rule of deference that would require federal courts to acquiesce whenever the government announces a new, post-conviction statutory interpretation.”

Sullivan said he disagreed with the majority’s conclusion that confidential information held by a government agency is not property.

David Patton, a lawyer who defended Blaszczak, declined comment.

A prosecutor’s spokesperson also declined comment.

[ad_2]

Source link

December 27, 2022
Divided appeals court rejects 4 insider trading convictions

[ad_1]

NEW YORK — A divided appeals court on Tuesday rejected the insider trading convictions of four men, including an ex-government employee turned consultant, prompting a sharp dissent from a judge who says the ruling may prompt insiders to sell confidential government information to the highest bidders.

The decision of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals came in a case in which a Washington consultant, David Blaszczak, was charged with converting government secrets into hedge fund profits.

In 2018, a jury convicted Blaszczak and three hedge fund employees in a scheme prosecutors said enabled the hedge fund workers to make over $3.5 million illegally for their company from 2012 through 2014. The Securities and Exchange Commission said the profits reached $3.9 million.

Before becoming a consultant, Blaszczak worked at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

The SEC and prosecutors said he boasted about access to government information about the timing and content of planned changes to reimbursement rules affecting publicly traded health care-related companies.

In a 2-to-1 decision Tuesday, the 2nd Circuit said it was reversing its prior affirmance of the convictions after the U.S. Supreme Court urged further consideration to consider its reversal of convictions of officials in the administration of former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

In that case, the Supreme Court concluded that politically motivated conduct by the officials to cause significant traffic gridlock for several days at the New Jersey entrance to the George Washington Bridge linking New Jersey and Manhattan was not a crime because they did not aim to deprive the bridge’s owners of money or property.

In the Blaszczak case, defense lawyers argued that their client’s information did not constitute property or a thing of value within the meaning of criminal laws pertaining to fraud and insider trading. Their argument, as it related to most counts, was supported by prosecutors in the most recent appeal.

The 2nd Circuit agreed to reverse the majority of convictions and vacated convictions on two other counts, leaving it to a lower court to decide whether a retrial on those counts will occur.

In a dissent, Circuit Judge Richard A. Sullivan blasted the ruling. He wrote that it “effectively permits sophisticated insiders to leverage their access to confidential government information and sell it to the highest bidders — in this case, hedge funds that used the confidential information to make millions shorting the stocks of public companies affected by CMS’s regulations.”

He said the ruling also “threatens to upend decades of settled precedent concerning frauds premised on the theft of intangible property and suggests — in what amounts to dicta — a curious and troubling rule of deference that would require federal courts to acquiesce whenever the government announces a new, post-conviction statutory interpretation.”

Sullivan said he disagreed with the majority’s conclusion that confidential information held by a government agency is not property.

David Patton, a lawyer who defended Blaszczak, declined comment.

A prosecutor’s spokesperson also declined comment.

[ad_2]

Source link

December 27, 2022
Netflix plans $900M facility at former New Jersey Army base

[ad_1]

Netflix said Wednesday it plans to build a state-of-the-art production facility at a former Army base at the Jersey Shore that will cost more than $900 million, and create thousands of jobs.

The subscription video streaming company will pay $55 million for a 292-acre site on the former Fort Monmouth military base in Eatontown and Oceanport.

The California-based company plans an additional $848 million worth of investments in 12 sound stages and for other uses related to the film industry.

“We’re thrilled to continue and expand our significant investment in New Jersey and North America,” said Ted Sarandos, the company’s co-CEO and chief content officer. “We believe a Netflix studio can boost the local and state economy with thousands of new jobs and billions in economic output, while sparking a vibrant production ecosystem in New Jersey.”

The announcement was made Wednesday evening, following a vote by the Fort Monmouth Economic Revitalization Authority to accept Netflix’s bid over three competing offers.

“This transformative investment will serve as a cornerstone in our efforts to create a thriving industry from whole cloth,” said New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy, a Democrat. “As a result of nearly a billion dollars in film production spending, New Jersey will further solidify its status as an emerging national leader in the television and film industries.”

He also said the project will create new housing, hotel and film-related businesses in the area, which has suffered economically since the Army closed the base in 2011.

The project is due to be completed in two phases over the course of several years.

The first will include the construction of a dozen sound stages, each ranging in size from 15,000 to 40,000 square feet (around 1,400 to 3,700 square meters).

Additional work may include office space, production services buildings and related studio space with the potential for consumer-focused components including retail uses.

“We are thrilled by the promise this Netflix project will deliver,” said Michele Siekerka, president and CEO of the New Jersey Business and Industry Association. “Jobs and innovation are at the heart of this Netflix-New Jersey partnership, just as they were throughout Fort Monmouth’s rich history.”

The plan still needs numerous levels of approvals from local and state officials.

Another TV and film production studio is set to be built in New Jersey on the site of a now-demolished public housing complex in Newark. The $125 million, 12-acres studio will be anchored by global entertainment provider Lionsgate, officials announced in May.

———

Follow Wayne Parry on Twitter at www.twitter.com/WayneParryAC

[ad_2]

Source link

December 21, 2022
New Jersey lawmakers pass gun carry legislation after ruling

[ad_1]

TRENTON, N.J. — New Jersey lawmakers gave final approval Monday to legislation overhauling rules to get a firearm carry permit after this summer’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling expanded gun rights.

The Democrat-led Senate passed the measure in what is scheduled to be the last voting session of the year, sending the legislation to Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy. He has said he planned to sign it into law.

Republicans opposed the measure, raising questions about its constitutionality and gun rights advocates predicted it wouldn’t pass constitutional muster.

“The 2nd Amendment cannot be ignored because New Jersey’s majority party does not like it,” GOP state Sen. Ed Durr said during a debate on the chamber’s floor. No Democrats spoke in favor of the measure on Monday, but earlier they said they believed the measure is constitutional.

The legislation scraps New Jersey’s current requirement that those seeking a permit to carry a firearm show “justifiable need” and be of “good character” to reflect the Supreme Court’s June ruling.

Other changes in the legislation include disqualifications for those who’ve been confined over their mental health, people who have had restraining orders as any “fugitive from justice.”

The measure calls for the end of a paper permitting system that used quadruplicate documents to register applicants. It also would establish a yet-to-be created online gun sales portal.

It increases from three to four the number of endorsements from non-family members in order to get a permit. They would also have to be interviewed by law enforcement officials as well.

The measure also boosts training requirements, calling for online, in-person classroom and target shooting instruction. And it would require permit carriers to carry liability insurance.

It bars people from carrying in many public places, including state buildings, schools, polling places, child-care facilities, publicly owned parks and beaches, as wells concert venues and bars.

New Jersey requires permits to both purchase as well as carry firearms. Purchase permits for handguns would go from $2 to $25 under the measure. For other firearms, the rate goes from $5 to $50. The measure calls for a $200 fee for a carrier’s permits. Current applications list a $50 fee. The increased fee would permit local governments to keep $150 for the cost of processing, with the remainder slated for the state’s office of crime victim’s compensation.

Scott Bach, the head of the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, predicted Monday the bill would “go down in flames” and amounted to a “big middle finger” to the Supreme Court.

[ad_2]

Source link

December 19, 2022