A Delaware constitutional amendment that would ensure absentee voting is available to all qualified voters passed the Senate again April 14, advancing a measure supporters say removes unnecessary barriers to casting a ballot.

Under current law, absentee voting is limited to voters who cannot cast a ballot in person for specific reasons, including disability, illness, religion, military service or caregiving.

The amendment, sponsored by Sen. Darius Brown, would establish an “absolute right” to vote absentee, allowing voters to request a ballot without providing an excuse. The proposal followed a 2022 Delaware Supreme Court ruling that struck down the broad use of absentee voting in the state.

A House amendment to the bill introduced by Rep. William Bush would remove permanent absentee status from the legislation, requiring ballot requests for each election. Permanent absentee status allowed voters unable to vote in person – including those with disabilities, in the military or living overseas – to automatically receive a ballot. That amendment cleared the House floor March 26.

On April 14, the adjusted amendment cleared the Senate with 14 lawmakers in favor, 5 against and 2 absent.   

The bill already passed the Senate last year. However, given legislative rules, the bill was sent back to its original chamber to consider the House amendment.  

A closer look: Efforts to protect absentee, early voting in Delaware clear House

Because this is a first-leg amendment, it will also require passage in the next, all-new General Assembly to make it to the state’s constitution.    

Brown has also backed a related amendment that would permit early, in-person voting in primaries as well as general and special elections. Under the proposal, early voting would begin 10 calendar days before an election. 

The amendment cleared both the Senate and the House, and like its legislative sibling, will also need the approval of the next General Assembly.  

Olivia Montes covers state government and community impact for Delaware Online/The News Journal. If you have a tip or a story idea, reach out to her at omontes@delawareonline.com.

• A Delaware court has ruled that Tesla can move shareholder lawsuits against it to Texas.
• Stockholders sued to keep the legal proceedings in Delaware, but the court dismissed their case.
• The ruling upholds the decision made by the corporation’s owners on where to pursue litigation.

Tesla has won the right to move lawsuits filed against the company from Delaware to Texas, where it’s presently headquartered.

A judge in Delaware sided with Tesla, which was founded in California but is now based in Austin in a case involving stockholders who sued to challenge Tesla’s relocation plans in 2024.

Tesla had asked the court to dismiss the motion from its stockholders who were upset at its plans to convert from a Delaware corporation for legal purposes to a Texas-based organization. Tesla had previously designated Delaware as its exclusive forum for cases involving shareholders who sue a company in which they own stock in, but the company was seeking to change the designation to Texas.

The court said Delaware law requires it to only deny forum-selection decisions by corporations such as Tesla “to the limited extent necessary” to avoid a result that would be inequitable to the automaker or any other company that was based in the state.

The court said on the “on the present facts, it is not inequitable” to Telsa to uphold Delaware laws regarding court case jurisdictions.

Tesla did not respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit.

Why is Tesla being sued?

Tesla was sued by at least three of its stockholders in April 2024 after it announced plans to convert from a Delaware corporation to a Texas one.

A federal judge in Wilmington has ordered the Delaware Department of Labor to hand over confidential state employer data to Immigration and Customs Enforcement investigators.

On April 13, U.S. District Judge Colm Connolly ordered Delaware labor officials to comply with a federal immigration subpoena they had “ignored,” writing that the state lacked legal grounds to resist it and that its political arguments were “wholly inappropriate.”

The subpoena seeks wage reports and employee rosters containing confidential employee information for 15 businesses and sought by ICE investigators as part of President Donald Trump’s mass deportation agenda.

Attorneys representing the state’s Department of Labor justified their noncompliance by arguing that local and federal regulators give state officials the authority to refuse federal investigators’ requests. They warned that allowing ICE to access employer data would discourage reporting and weaken the unemployment insurance program.

Local federal attorneys representing ICE argued the department is legally required to hand over the data targeting businesses that tip-line reports put under suspicion of employing undocumented individuals. In court filings, they said the state’s refusal to comply amounts to a legally unsound disagreement with federal immigration policy.

The arguments: Federal judge questions Delaware’s attempt to sidestep ICE subpoena

The contested subpoena was the last in a series that went unanswered by state labor officials during the first quarter of 2025. The subpoenas themselves are not legally confidential. However, Connolly, the presiding judge, sealed the final subpoena – the one at issue in the case – after federal officials sued the state to force compliance.