Home > Get Involved > By the People Lobby Days > Legislative Agenda

ByThePeopleLogoSmall.jpg

2013 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Georgia is committed to the protection of civil liberties and civil rights of all Georgians.

In the 2013 Legislative Session of the Georgia General Assembly, the ACLU of Georgia will continue to counter growing threats to fundamental freedoms and remain steadfast in the ongoing fight for justice.

As the session moves forward, we will continue to update our legislative agenda. You may download a paper copy of our legislative agenda here.

The bills and resolutions listed below comprise the ACLU of Georgia’s current legislative agenda:

Criminal Justice Disability Rights Education
Equality
Immigrants' Rights
Reproductive Justice
Speech

Voting Rights
Economic Justice Open Government
 Privacy

Racial Justice
Juvenille Justice      

Criminal Justice


  • Expanded Use of Death Penalty (HB 355)

    • Would allow for the imposition of the death penalty whenever a murder is committed in the course of any gang-related activity. This would greatly expand the use of the death penalty in Georgia. Many activities that are considered “gang-related” are not as severe as the current list of aggravating circumstances that are currently required before the death penalty can be imposed.
    • ACLU Position: OPPOSE
    • Committee: unassigned
    • Status:
      • Second Read - 02/20/13

  • Denial of Commercial Licenses to Registered Sex Offenders (HB 40/SB84)

    • Prohibits persons on the sexual offender registry from obtaining class “P” (passenger vehicles with 16 or more persons) and “S” (school buses) commercial drivers’ licenses.
    • Appeals to a denial are subject to the Georgia Administrative Procedure Act, meaning that individuals would have to appeal within 30 days.
    • Driving without the endorsements in violation of this proposal constitutes a felony punishable by two years, fine of $5,000.00 or both.

    Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform (HB 1)

    • Civil asset forfeiture occurs when law enforcement seize the property of an individual suspected of a crime. Georgia has some of the worst civil asset forfeiture laws in the country. It is very easy for law enforcement to seize and profit off an individual’s property and it is very difficult for those individuals to regain their property even upon demonstrating their innocence.

    • This bill makes the following improvements to Georgia’s civil asset forfeiture law:
      • Elevates the state’s burden of proof to a showing of “clear and convincing evidence that seized property is subject to forfeiture.”
      • Denies law enforcement agencies access to civil forfeiture proceeds where agencies misuse “property derived or resulting from civil forfeiture actions” as well as deny access to forfeiture proceeds where agencies fail to submit and make public (through the Carl Vinson Institute of Government) annual reports “specifying the property received during the fiscal year and clearly identifying the use of such property, including the specifics of all monetary expenditures.”
      • Requires Georgia law enforcement receiving federal forfeiture proceeds comply with Georgia’s proposed accountability restrictions as well.
      • Caps forfeiture proceeds paid to district attorneys’ offices at 10% of forfeiture proceeds and limit applicable usage of such payments to the offices’ “trial expenses, victim-witness services, training expenses, travel expenses, and maintenance or improvement of equipment.”Clarifies forfeiture laws in Georgia through a comprehensive re-write–including eliminating obsolete and conflicting code.
      However, this bill does NOT make many necessary reforms to our code.
      • It still allows law enforcement to seize property from individuals even where those individuals have been acquitted of all wrongdoing or where all pending criminal charges have been dismissed.
      • Even if a person is acquitted of all wrongdoing, the burden of reclaiming one’s property lies with the innocent property owner instead of the state.
      • It allows law enforcement to keep property even if the property was seized during an unconstitutional search and seizure.
      • Innocent co-owners have no redress if their vehicle is seized based on the conduct of the other co-owner. If a husband and wife jointly own a vehicle, the innocent spouse will not be able to retain a vehicle that is seized due to the conduct of the other spouse, even if the innocent spouse had no knowledge of the conduct that gave rise to the forfeiture.
    • ACLU Position: MONITOR
    • Sponsored by (1) Rep. Wendell Willard (2) Rep. Edward Lindsey ( 3) Stacey Abrams (4) Rep. Earl Ehrhart (5) Rep. Don Parsons (6) Rep. Willie Talton
    • Committee: House Judiciary
    • Status: Favorably Reported - 02/28/13
      • House Withdrawn & Recommitted - 03/07/13

Disability Rights

  • Blind Persons’ Braille Literacy Rights and Education Act (HB 18)

    • Requires an evaluation of a blind or visually impaired child to determine the child's need for Braille instruction; requires Braille instruction in the individualized education program (IEP) of a blind or visually impaired student; requires textbook publishers to make their material available in electronic format for the visually impaired; to electronic materials.
    • ACLU Position: SUPPORT
    • Sponsored by (1) Rep. Keisha Waites (60th)
    • Committee: House Education
    • Status: Second Read - 02/26/13

ECONOMIC JUSTICE

  • Parent Protection Act (HB 166)

    • Would require employers to allow their employees to take leave to attend school conferences and medical appointments.
    • ACLU Position: SUPPORT
    • Sponsored by (1) Rep. Roger Bruce; (2) Rep. Tonya Anderson (3) Rep. Stacey Abrams; (4) Rep. Carolyn Hugley; (5) Rep. Billy Mitchell; (6) Rep. Scott Holcomb
    • Committee: House Industry and Labor
    • Status
      • House Second Reader – 02/01/13
  • Resolution to encourage federal, state and local governments to promote educational opportunities for low-income women by:
    • (1) Enforcing anti-discrimination laws contained in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and Title IX of the Education Amendments;
    • (2) Increasing investments in counseling, career development, child care, domestic violence screening, and financial aid;
    • (3) Increasing investments in programs that increase women and girls proficiency in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics; and
    • (4) Amending TANF regulations to include postsecondary education as “an allowable work activity,” thereby allowing TANF recipients to enroll in two and four-year degree programs.
  • ACLU Position: SUPPORT
  • Sponsored by (1) Rep. Sandra Scott; (2) Rep. Keisha Waites; (3) Rep. Sharon Beasley-Teague; (4) Rep. Shelia Jones
  • Committee: House Health and Human Services
  • Status:
    • House Second Reader – 01/30/13
  • Encourages the President and Congress to adopt the Paycheck Fairness Act in order to help close the wage gap between male and female employees.
  • ACLU Position: SUPPORT
  • Sponsored by (1) Rep. Sheila Jones; (2) Rep. Keisha Waites
  • Committee: House Industry and Labor
  • Status:
    • House Second Reader – 02/04/13

Education

  • Parent/Teacher Trigger Act (HB 123)

    • This would allow parents or teachers in low-achieving schools to petition local school boards and demand that those schools be converted to charter schools or that an approved turn-around model be implemented within the school. The petition must be signed by more than 50% of parents whose children attend the school, or by more than 50% of teachers at the low-achieving school.
    • The local school board can deny the petition by majority vote, unless more than 60% of parents or teachers have signed the petition, in which case the board may only override the petition with a 2/3 vote.
    • The law would prohibit private companies from initiating a petition or compensating parents or faculty who initiate the petition.
    • Any school that is converted to a charter school or which implements a turn-around model must continue to serve all children within its attendance zone, and all children who attended the school in the previous year. Parents would have the option of removing their children from the converted school and placing them in a different public school within the system (if one exists).
    • The law does not allow these petitions to be initiated against charter schools (thus, it is a one way street of converting public schools to charter schools).
    • ACLU Position: OPPOSE
    • The ACLU opposes this bill in its current form. The ACLU would support legislation that would empower parents/teachers to petition local boards to implement approved turn-around models within low-achieving schools.
    • The ACLU does not support the expansion of charter schools until there is greater oversight and accountability within the charter school system.
    • Committee: Senate Education & Youth
    • Status:
      • House Passed/Adopted by Substitute – 03/05/13
      • Senate Read & Referred 03/07/13

  • Expansion of School-to-Prison Pipeline(HB 512)

    • Would allow school personnel to carry guns in schools, on school buses and at school-related events.

    • We believe this bill would lead to an expansion of the School-to-Prison Pipeline, a disturbing national trend wherein children, disproportionately children of color and students with disabilities, are being funneled out of public schools and into the juvenile and criminal justice systems. Several policy trends in the public education and juvenile justice systems are to blame for this nationwide epidemic, such as the trend toward "zero-tolerance" policies criminalizing minor instances of school misconduct, the lack of due process protections in school disciplinary procedures, and the introduction of armed school resource officers (police officers) in the schools.

    • Allowing school personnel to carry weapons will likely have the effect of intimidating students, and will shift the school environment from an institution of learning to a prison-like, disciplinary facility.

    • There is no evidence that arming school personnel will promote safety within schools. The ACLU of Georgia believes that any attempt to promote school safety should be based on evidence-based practices.

    • It appears that even the authors of the bill realize that this could actually undermine school safety because the bill seeks to relieve school systems of all liability if an accident occurs as a result of this new policy.

    • ACLU Position: OPPOSE

    • Sponsored in the House by (1) Rep. Rick Jasperse; (2) Rep. John Meadows; (3) Rep. Jay Roberts; (4) Rep. Mandi Ballinger; (5) Rep. Alan Powell; (6) Rep. Dustin Hightower

    • Sponsered in the Senate by (1) Sen. Frank Ginn; (2) Sen. Jesse Stone; (3) Sen. Ross Tolleson; (4) Sen. Jeff Mullis; (5) Sen. Judson Hill; (6) Sen. John Wilkinson

    • Committee: Senate Judiciary Non-Civil

    • Status:

      • Senate Passed/Adopted by Substitue - 03/22/13

      • House Passed/Adopted by Substitute - 03/22/13

      • Senate Disagrees with House Amendment/Sub 03/22/13

  • Mandatory Reporting for Bullying in Schools (HB 15)

    • Adds incidents of bullying to the list of data that schools are required to compile and report. No individually identifying data will be collected or reported. Principals are required to present this data to the school council and work on strategies to address bullying.
    • ACLU Position: SUPPORT
    • Sponsored by (1) Rep. Keisha Waites
    • Status: Prefiled – 11/28/12

  • “Invest in the Future Act” (SB 42)

    • Requires that the General Assembly allocate enough money to fully fund the Quality Basic Education (QBE) Formula, salaries of school personnel, educational programs such as the English Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) program, educational materials, and other essential education services. The General Assembly currently has discretion as to whether these essential education services are fully funded. The bill also states that it will be the intent of the legislature to restore all cuts that have been made to state school systems since 2002.
    • ACLU Position: SUPPORT
    • Sponsored by (1) Sen. Valencia Seay; (2) Sen. Vincent Fort; (3) Sen. Horacena Tate; (4) Sen. Ed Harbinson; (5) Sen. David Lucas; (6) Sen. Steve Henson
    • Committee: Senate Appropriations
    • Status:
      • Senate Read and Referred – 01/15/13

  • Anti-Discrimination Act (___)(see under “EQUALITY” below).

Equality

Immigrants’ Rights

  • Proof of Legal Status (HB 125)

    • This bill was originally intended to fix several of the problems associated with Georgia’s anti-immigration law (HB 87). However, it was recently changed to make life more difficult for Georgia’s immigrant community. The revised bill would:
      • Prohibit immigrants from using their passport as an acceptable form of identification. This would apply to immigrants who are attempting to provide identification to municipalities in order to gain essential services like water, basic utilities, access to municipal buildings, or enrolling their children in school. This could also interfere with an individual’s fundamental constitutional right to marry because many Georgia counties, including Fulton, allow the use of a foreign passport to obtain a marriage certificate.
      • The bill would also include a driver’s license in the list of “public benefits” that are denied to many immigrants. This would mean that many lawfully present immigrants, such as individuals with Temporary Protected Status and DREAMers granted work authorization, would be denied driver’s licenses.

      • The Senate amended this bill to remove all the harmful anti-immigrant provisions. The Senate bill will meet the original purpose of the bill by making the necessary administrative fix.
    • ACLU Position: OPPOSE the House version; Support the Senate version
    • Sponsored by (1) Rep. Dustin Hightower (2) Rep. Rich Golick (3) Rep. Rick Jasperse
    • Status:
      • House Passed/Adopted by substitute - 3/04/13
      • Senate Committee Favorable Reported by Substitute - 03/21/13
    • This would take away unemployment benefits from many immigrants that are currently eligible to receive them such as refugees, asylees, parolees, and immigrants admitted on conditional entry. Therefore, SB 2 threatens to narrow the scope of eligibility for immigrants applying for unemployment benefits.
    • Additionally, the bill would broaden verification requirements for unemployment benefit applicants by requiring verification of lawful presence both (a) at the time payments are made to the applicant, and (b) at the time of employment. If the bill is passed into law, immigrants still eligible for unemployment benefits will need to verify their lawful presence twice.
    • This also sets a low burden of proof on the state to deny applications for unemployment benefits on the basis of unlawful status.
    • ACLU Position: OPPOSE
    • Sponsored by (1) Sen. John Albers; (2) Sen. Butch Miller; (3) Sen. Joshua McKoon; (4) Sen. Steve Gooch; (5) Sen. Hunter Hill; (6) Sen. Mike Crane
    • Committee: Senate Insurance & Labor
    • Status:
      • Senate Read and Referred – 01/17/13

OPEN GOVERNMENT

  • These bills seek to limit the influence of lobbyists and special interests by eliminating most lobbyist gifts and enhancing reporting requirements. However, the current proposals will expand the definition of “lobbyist” to include ordinary citizens who voice their opinions to any legislator other than one of their own elected officials. This means that all citizens who wish to voice their views to various members of committees and party leaders will be required to pay over $300 to register as a lobbyist. This will chill protected speech and the ACLU opposes these bills in their current form.
  • ACLU Position: OPPOSE
  • Sponsored by (1) House Speaker David Ralston; (2) Rep. Larry O’Neal; (3) Rep. Calvin Smyre; (4) Rep. Jan Jones; (5) Rep. Edward Lindsey; (6) Rep. Richard Smith
  • Committee: Senate Rules
  • Status:
    • House Passed – 02/25/13;
    • Senate Passed by Substitute - 03/21/13

PRIVACY

  • Employee Privacy Protection Act (HB 117/HB 149)

    • Prohibits employers from requesting any information that would allow the employer to access a prospective or current employee’s personal social media account, including the employee’s username, password, or any other means that would grant access. Furthermore, an employer is prohibited from requesting that an employee access or divulge in his or her social media in the presence of the employer.
      • There are two exceptions:
        • 1) An employer may request that a current employee to divulge personal social media activity that is “reasonably believed” to be “relevant to” an investigation of the employee’s misconduct or violation of a statute. In this circumstance, the social media activity must be used solely for the purposes of the investigation.
        • 2) The employer is not prevented from requiring that an employee disclose any means of accessing non-personal accounts or services that provide access to the employer’s internal computer or information systems.
    • ACLU Position: SUPPORT
    • HB 117 sponsored by (1) Rep. Sandra Scott; (2) Rep. Darryl Jordan; (3) Rep. Sheila Jones; (4) Rep. Sharon Beasley-Teague; (5) Rep. Tyrone Brooks; (6) Rep. Keisha Waites

RACIAL JUSTICE

  • Expresses “profound remorse” on behalf of the State of Georgia for its role in the promotion of the institution of slavery, which this resolution rightfully characterizes as “cruel warfare against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty.”
  • ACLU Position: SUPPORT
  • Sponsored by (1) Sen. Barry Loudermilk; (2) Sen. William Ligon, Jr.; (3) Sen. Bill Heath; (4) Sen. Mike Crane; (5) Sen. John Albers; (6) Sen. Nan Orrock
  • Committee: Senate Rules
  • Status:
    • Senate Read and Referred – 01/28/13

  • Prohibition on Racial Profiling (HB 98/HB 121)(see “Criminal Justice” above).

Reproductive Justice

  • “Birth with Dignity Act” (HB 7)

    • Prohibits the use of restraints on pregnant female inmates unless there is a reasonable basis to believe that the use of restraints is necessary to prevent the inmate from injuring herself or others.
    • ACLU Position: SUPPORT
    • Sponsored by (1) Rep. Keisha Waites
    • Status:Prefiled – 11/26/12

Speech

  • Would prohibit state employees from using any state-owned or leased property (computers, telephones, fax machines, etc.) for the purposes of promoting or opposing the passage of any legislation in the General Assembly, or for promoting or opposing the approval or veto of any legislation by the Governor.
  • This would not apply to elected officials, public employees who are registered to lobby for their agency/department and who is engaging lobbying on behalf of that agency, or public employees whose opinions have been solicited by members of the General Assembly.
  • ACLU Position: OPPOSE
    • This would prohibit protected speech. For example, a state employee would be prohibited from sending a personal email to an elected official on a particular bill or from signing a petition from his work computer, even if the conduct occurred during a scheduled break.
  • Sponsored by (1) Rep. Mark Hamilton; (2) Rep. Jan Jones; (3) Rep. Allen Peake; (4) Rep. Jay Powell; 5) Rep. Mike Dudgeon; (6) Rep. Paulette Braddock.
  • Committee: House Governmental Affairs
  • Status:
    • House Second Reader – 02/08/13

Voting Rights

JUVENILE JUSTICE

  • Juvenile Justice Reform (HB 242)

    • This is a comprehensive re-write of the juvenile justice code, which incorporates several juvenile justice reforms that were recommended by the Governor’s Special Council on Justice Reform.

    • The following summary is an edited down version of the full summary provided by JUST Georgia. You can access JUST Georgia’s full report at http://www.justga.org/initiatives/juvenile-code/hb-242-juvenile-justice-reform-bill/HB242LongSummary_021813.pdf

    • HB 242 makes the following important reforms:

    • Updates definitions to make Georgia’s code more consistent with the federal government and with virtually all other states. Provides clear definitions for terms such as “abuse,” “child in need of services (CHINS),” “dependency,” and “party.”

    • Separates “designated felonies” into two classes. Class A felonies are the most serious felonies because they pose a greater risk to the community. Class B felonies pose less risk to the community.

    • Judges must consider additional factors before ordering restrictive custody for a child who has committed a designated felony (i.e., maturity, culpability, education, dependency, etc.

    • If a child is determined to be a low-risk offender, the court cannot order restrictive custody unless it specifies writing why restrictive custody is necessary.

    • Judges are given greater flexibility in determining the length of sanctions for children adjudicated of a designated felony.

    • The Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) would have more flexibility in placing children found to have committed class B designated felonies. Children assessed to be low risk may be assigned to non-secure facilities for their entire term. Children assessed to be medium or high risk must spend at least half of their terms in secure confinement, but can be placed elsewhere for the remainder of their terms.

    • Reduces the time before a child found to have committed either class of designated felony may petition the court for early release. Currently, a child may not file a motion for early release until one year into his or her term of restrictive custody and if the motion is denied, may not bring another motion for another year. Under HB 242, the first motion may be filed at any time, and a new motion may be filed six months after a motion has been denied.

    • Clarifies that a child, as a party, generally has a right to be present during his or her juvenile court proceedings unless the court determines that it is in the child’s best interest not to attend.

    • Improves data collection within the Department of Juvenile Justice.

    • Clarifies that a child in any dependency case is entitled to an attorney and guardian ad litem, and that the same person can be appointed in both capacities unless or until a conflict arises between an attorney’s duties to the child as client and the attorney’s considered opinion of the child’s best interests.

    • A child’s right to an attorney cannot be waived.

    • Creates presumption that children should be allowed to unsupervised visits with their parents.

    • Emphasizes that siblings who are taken into state custody should be keep together whenever possible.

    • Clarifies that the Division of Family and Children’s Services (DFCS) must show it has made reasonable efforts to preserve or reunite the family or to find another permanent home for the child at every hearing, and provides factors for the court to consider in determining whether reasonable efforts have been made.

    • Requires that proceedings are timely.

    • Clarifies that in CHINS cases, children should receive services in the least restrictive environment possible, preferably at home with their parents, but if that is not appropriate then children should be in DFCS care. The court must consider whether services could be structured to allow the child to remain in his or her home.

    • Prohibits a child in need of services from being held in a jail or other detention facility intended for adults, and limits the use of secure detention to only those children who have run away from home or who are ungovernable. A child in need of services may not be held in secure detention for more than 24 hours before a court hearing and 24 hours after the hearing.

    • ACLU Position: SUPPORT

    • Sponsored by (1) Rep. Wendell Willard; (2) Rep. Christian Coomer; (3) Rep. Matt Hatchett; (4) Rep. Chad Nimmer; (5) Rep. Mary Margaret Oliver; (6) Rep. Jay Neal

    • Committee: Senate Judiciary

    • Status: House Passed – 02/28/13;

    • Senate Passed - 03/21/13