Legislation

We opposed this bill which would have created an “animal abuse registry” similar to the registration requirements already in effect for persons convicted of sex offenses.

The ACLU expressed concerns about the breadth of this legislation, which allows representatives of the RISPCA, a private organization, to seize animals if they appeared to be “aged,” “disabled,” or “sick,” without any requirement of exigent circumstances.

This legislation would have prohibited the questioning of a juvenile suspected of criminal activity without a parent or legal guardian present.

These bills would have ensured judicial oversight in the process of asset seizure by law enforcement, and would have provided for the ability of Rhode Island residents to retain their belongings without the burdens that a civil forfeiture process places upon them.

Opposed by the ACLU, this legislation would have allowed Advanced Practice Registered Nurses (APRNs) to attest to a patients’ mental health condition and participate in certifying patients for mandated outpatient treatment, an action which is presently something that only doctors can do.

Similar to legislation introduced in previous years, this bill would have allowed a physician to request a hold on a substance-abusing patient and would have provided a process for a court hearing to determine if emergency commitment would be appropriate for the patient.

This legislation provides an “ability-to-pay” hearing to authorize payment plans or a reduction in the fines owed before a driver’s license suspension is imposed as punishment.

This bill would have granted constitutionally problematic powers to both the Department of Environmental Management and the RISPCA.

This year, the General Assembly overwhelmingly approved deeply troubling legislation requiring judges to bar from owning animals not only anyone convicted of "unnecessary cruelty," but any other animal abuse offense.