Court Cases

It is vital to our democracy for Delawareans to be able to easily access public records for public institutions in our state. The Delaware Department of Justice's inadequate and inaccurate responses to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests impedes the public's access to information they are rightfully entitled to have. As an organization that values government transparency, we will always fight to uphold the spirit of FOIA and the right of the people to be informed.

U.S. v. Albence is a lawsuit filed by the federal government that seeks to force the State of Delaware to disclose sensitive personal voter data, such as driver’s license numbers and Social Security information, for hundreds of thousands of Delawareans. After making repeated demands for the data, the U.S. Department of Justice was unsatisfied with the State’s offer of the public voter registration list that is readily available to all Delawareans. The Department continued to demand all unredacted sensitive data while failing to answer Delaware officials' questions about the legality of the request. No explanation was given for why this sensitive information was needed, or how it could be transferred in a way that did not violate federal and state laws. This case is one of more than twenty cases the U.S. has filed against multiple states to forcibly extract data that can be used to further the current anti-immigration agenda and the federal government's heavy-handed and escalating threats to states it perceives as enemies of the Trump administration. The federal government's sweeping request for Delawareans' voter data threatens our right to privacy and our right to vote. Delaware voters should feel secure that their sensitive personal information will be handled carefully and lawfully by the state and will not be disclosed and weaponized against them by the federal government. We won't stop fighting to preserve the safety of Delaware voters.

This is a habeas corpus petition challenging the state sentence of a man convicted of drug crimes because the court used evidence at the sentencing that was not subject to adversarial dispute and did not meet the requisite threshold of proof.