Safe Silver Spring 1/19/14
This notice covers 1) Legislative
Briefing Meeting with Frosh, Raskin, Dumais and Waldstreicher on 1/21 2)
Proposed Criminal Justice legislation
This notice can also be seen at http://tinyurl.com/sssnews011914
I. On January 21,
Safe Silver Spring will hold its annual briefing on upcoming criminal
justice legislation in this session of the General Assembly. The key speakers will be, Senator Brian Frosh, Chair, Senate Judicial
Proceedings Committee, Senator Jamie Raskin, Senate Judicial Proceedings
Committee Member, Delegate Kathleen Dumais, Vice-Chair, House Judiciary
Committee and Delegate Jeff Waldsteicher, House Judiciary Committee.
Sara Love of the ACLU MD has also been invited. The meeting will be
held at the Silver Spring Civic Building, 1 Veterans Plaza, 7 p.m. Many
thanks to Councilmembers Elrich, Leventhal and Riemer for sponsoring
this meeting, especially Councilmember Elrich for all his and his
staff's efforts to arrange this meeting space.
Senator Frosh played a leading role in gun safety this year as did
Raskin, Dumais and Waldstereicher. Let's show them are our
appreciation.
To rsvp to this meeting, see https://www.facebook.com/events/711142078895824/?ref=3&ref_newsfeed_story_type=regular
Other cosponsors of this meeting are: Prezco (President’s Council of
Silver Spring Civic Associations), Delegates Hucker and Mizeur, Greater
Silver Spring Democratic Club, Montgomery County Young Dems, Maryland
Multicultural Youth Centers, Renter's Alliance, Pyramid Atlantic, and
Marylanders to Prevent Gun Violence.
II. Legislative proposals which will be part of the discussion on Tuesday.
This package has legislation proposed by Senator Raskin, the ACLU MD and the House of Ruth. This package can also be seen at http://tinyurl.com/sss011914legis
1) Here is a preliminary list of bills that Senator Raskin will sponsor.
a) A package of privacy related bills on law enforcement requiring
police to have search warrants in order to use your cell phone to track
you, keep data from license plate scanners, use drones for surveillance
and read your emails. These are bi-partisan bills in the Senate and
House, working with Sen. Shank from Washington County on the Senate
side.
b) A bill granting the state prosecutor and deputy prosecutor the ability to provide immunity to witnesses.
c) Reintroducing the rape and paternity bill which allows rape victims
to petition the court for denial of paternity rights (visitation,
custody, etc..) to rapists who conceive a child in the course of their
assault.
d) Regulation and taxation of marijuana
2) ACLU MD legislative priorities
CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Marijuana Policy Reform. The
ACLU of Maryland supports the full decriminalization, taxation and
regulation of marijuana possession. The War on Drugs has failed. Our
law enforcement spend an inordinate amount of time, energy and money
arresting people for marijuana possession, yet, 44% of all violent
crimes in Maryland go unsolved. Furthermore, these failed laws are
enforced in a questionable manner: a 2013 report by the National ACLU
office showed that despite comparable rates of use among Blacks and
Whites in America, blacks are overwhelmingly arrested more than whites,
and in rates disproportionate to their percentage of the population.
The ACLU of Maryland released Maryland-based report that showed similar
problems: in every county in Maryland, Blacks were arrested
disproportionately to Whites. Furthermore, our law enforcement wastes
$106 million a year in marijuana possession arrests – approximately
$6,000 per arrest. That waste, combined with a lost revenue of around
$100 million a year that taxed marijuana sales would bring in, creates
an economic imbalance that is unnecessary.
Shackling of Pregnant Women in Custody. Shockingly, even in
2013, women in custody are being shackled during transport, labor and
delivery. For the second year in a row, the ACLU of Maryland will be
supporting legislation to end this barbaric practice.
PRIVACY
Technology is rapidly advancing. Law
enforcement and government officials can – and should – be able to take
advantage of these advancements without invading people’s privacy. This
session the ACLU of Maryland will be supporting four bills that strike
this balance:
1. Email surveillance. We increasingly are living our
lives online. Yet outdated privacy laws allow the government to
intercept and access a treasure trove of information about who we are,
where we go and what we do – the information being collected by search
engines, social networking sites and other websites every day – without
having to go before a neutral arbiter and prove that the information
they are obtaining is likely to turn up evidence of a crime – the
standard law enforcement would have to meet if they were searching for
the same information in the offline world.
2. Location Tracking. Where you go reveals a great deal
about who you are and what you value. Given the intimate information
one’s location can reveal, law enforcement should get a warrant based on
probable cause prior to obtaining that information. That will ensure
that legitimate investigations can proceed, while protecting innocent
Marylanders from unjustified invasions of their privacy.
3. Drones. The availability of cheap, small, portable
flying video surveillance threatens to eradicate existing practical
limits on aerial surveillance and allow for pervasive surveillance,
police fishing expeditions, and abusive use of these tools. Just as we
need to impose regulations on regular video surveillance, so too should
we impose rules, limits and regulations on aerial surveillance.
4. Automatic License Plate Recorders. ALPRs are cameras
fixed at stationary locations or on police vehicles that can scan and
record thousands of license plates a minute. The devices automatically
check each plate against various watchlists, providing an instant alert
whenever a match or “hit” appears. When the ALPR system captures an
image of a car it also tags each file with the time, date and GPS
location of the photograph. When ALPRs are used for narrowly tailored
law enforcement purposes, such as identifying vehicles that are stolen,
involved in a crime, or associated with fugitives, they are a reasonable
use of technology, because they are focused solely on people accused of
wrongdoing. But there is no reason to store records of plates and
locations that are not ‘hits’ against any database.
3. Here is a list of bills that the House of Ruth supports
SB 28 - Family Law - Peace Orders and Protective Orders – Burden of Proof–
This bill would change the standard of proof in protective order and
peace order cases from clear and convincing evidence to a preponderance
of the evidence, the standard by which a judge in a final protective or
peace order hearing must find that abuse has occurred before the judge
may grant a final protective or peace order.
The Washington Post had an editorial on this legislation on January 10.
Maryland’s domestic abuse victims deserve better protections
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/marylands-victims-of-domestic-abuse-deserve-greater-protection/2014/01/10/784ec65a-7892-11e3-b1c5-739e63e9c9a7_story.html
SB 41 - Domestic Violence – Persons Eligible for Relief -
This bill will allow people who are in dating relationships and sexual
relationships to be covered under the protective order statute. Under
the current law, they are only eligible for peace orders.
Committing a Crime of Violence in the Presence of a Minor - Penalties – This
bill would prohibit a person from committing a crime of violence when
the person knows or reasonably should know that a minor is present.
Permanent Final Protective Orders – Under the current law,
protective orders are only in effect for one or two years. There are
very few circumstances under which a court can order a permanent
protective order. Under this proposed law, the circumstances under
which a permanent protective order could be ordered would be expanded.
Revision to Modification, Rescission, and Appeals of Protective Orders – Revise protective order statute to address the issue decided in the La Valle case. La Valle
held that the protective order statute does not permit a court to
extend an expired protective order, even when the motion to extend such
order was timely filed during the term of the order. An expired
protective order no longer exists, and an untimely hearing cannot revive
it. This bill would establish a procedure to extend protective orders
that are about to or have already expired if the request is timely
filed.
HB 29 - Maryland Law Enforcement Trust Act –
This bill would clarify the parameters of local participation in
federal immigration enforcement efforts by providing that when an
individual becomes eligible for release from State or local custody, a
law enforcement official may not continue to detain the individual on
the basis of an immigration detainer. Hearing in the House Judiciary Committee on January 28.
Click to view this email in a browser
