An Act Amending Title 10 Of The Delaware Code Relating To Civil Arrests.
HB150 amends Delaware Title 10 to create a statutory prohibition on civil arrests in and around courthouses and certain administrative hearing locations. The bill defines “civil arrest” as an arrest or detention for noncriminal matters, and it bars such arrests while a person is going to, remaining at, or returning from a courthouse or the Office of the Delaware Industrial Accident Board, as well as while participating in or attending judicial or Industrial Accident Board proceedings as a party, witness, attorney, or observer. The prohibition also extends to immediate surrounding areas such as entryways, driveways, sidewalks, parking areas, and grounds intended to serve those facilities.
The bill includes exceptions. It does not apply to arrests made pursuant to a judicial order authorizing the arrest, and it allows a law enforcement officer to conduct a civil arrest inside a courthouse or Industrial Accident Board office if advance written notice is provided to the presiding judge or administrative officer with specified details about the person, the violation, supporting paperwork, and the time and location of the attempted arrest. The bill also authorizes judicial officers and Industrial Accident Board representatives to take steps to protect access and proceedings, and it creates remedies for violations, including habeas corpus relief, civil liability for false imprisonment, and possible attorneys’ fees and costs.
The bill’s impact on state law is to add a new Chapter 82 to Title 10 governing civil arrests and to establish a protected zone around Delaware courts and Industrial Accident Board hearing locations. It changes the legal rules for when civil process may be executed at these sites and gives affected individuals and institutions enforcement tools if the prohibition is violated. It also specifically incorporates workers’ compensation-related administrative proceedings before the Delaware Industrial Accident Board into the protection.
The general sentiment reflected in the bill text and its vote appears supportive of the measure’s goal of protecting access to courts and administrative proceedings. The stated rationale emphasizes the orderly administration of justice, public access, and the need to prevent disruptions or intimidation associated with civil arrests in these settings. The House third reading vote of 25 yeas to 13 nays suggests meaningful support, but not unanimity.
The main point of contention is the balance between protecting court access and preserving law enforcement’s ability to execute civil arrests. Opponents may be concerned that the bill restricts civil process or creates operational burdens through notice requirements and liability exposure, while supporters frame the measure as necessary to safeguard due process, public access, and the integrity of judicial and administrative proceedings. The substitute version also broadened the bill to cover Industrial Accident Board locations, indicating an expansion of the protected settings beyond courthouses alone.
HB150 would add a new chapter to Title 10 of the Delaware Code prohibiting civil arrests in courthouses and at Delaware Industrial Accident Board hearing locations, including nearby access areas. It creates exceptions for arrests authorized by judicial order and for arrests preceded by detailed written notice to the presiding judge or administrative officer, and it provides remedies such as habeas corpus, false-imprisonment damages, and attorneys’ fees. The bill directly affects law enforcement, litigants, witnesses, attorneys, court personnel, and workers’ compensation participants by limiting where civil process may be carried out.
The overall sentiment appears favorable toward protecting the functioning and openness of courts and administrative hearings. The bill’s findings and synopsis present the measure as a safeguard for justice system access and public participation, and the House vote indicates a majority in support. At the same time, the nontrivial number of nays suggests some concern about restricting civil arrests and imposing procedural requirements on law enforcement.
The central controversy is whether Delaware should bar civil arrests in and around courts and Industrial Accident Board proceedings to prevent disruption and intimidation, or whether that protection goes too far by limiting civil enforcement tools. Supporters emphasize access to justice, courtroom integrity, and protection of participants and observers. Potential critics are likely to focus on the notice requirement, the exception structure, and the possibility of civil liability for officers or agencies that fail to comply.