Legislation

In a move to address the fundamental due process implications of civil asset forfeiture, we supported legislation which would have provided stricter judicial oversight to the process and ensured that law enforcement cannot seize and forfeit a person’s belongings in the absence of criminal charges.

While supporting the goal of this legislation which would establish an alternative sentencing method for individuals with severe and persistent mental illness, we expressed concern that the legislation contained sparse detail on how the implementation of the program would occur.

While we have no objection to the goal of educating hotel employees to ensure that they understand the issue of human trafficking, we opposed provisions within this bill which would obligate employees to report “suspicious” activities.

As a state with one of the most protective Law Enforcement Officers’ Bill of Rights statutes in the country, it is long past time for significant revisions to be made to this law. A number of bills to do that were introduced this session.

While most states employ a statewide certification or decertification system for law enforcement personnel, RI is one of only four states that does not. This legislation would have corrected that by creating strict criteria for the decertification of officers who engage in unacceptable conduct.

Although the imposition of expansive, mandatory background checks for employment is concerning in itself, even more concerning are those bills which attempt to implement background checks with a notably wide breadth and no meaningful restrictions.

A proposed article in the FY 2022 budget contained several important criminal justice proposals, including provisions providing for geriatric parole and making critical adjustments to statutes concerning community confinement, work-release wages, and parole reform.

As the likelihood of recreational marijuana legalization in RI advances, it has become even more critical to ensure that civil liberties and social equity concerns are prioritized and centered. Both the proposed FY 2022 budget and standalone legislation seek to do so, but far from comprehensively.

In opposing this legislation which would have lowered the age which would define an “elder” from 65 to 60 years old for the purposes of the criminal offense of “exploiting an elder,” we noted the extremely harsh penalties in the statute.