This Act is a second substitute for Senate Bill No. 19. This substitute bill differs from Senate Bill No. 19 by doing the following: (1) Reorganizing the proposed "Delaware Payment Stablecoins Act" as Chapter 35 of Title 5, rather than Chapter 40 as originally proposed in Senate Bill No. 19. (2) Creating § 3508, which restricts non-financial public companies from issuing payment stablecoins. (3) Creating § 3518, which establishes a voluntary registration pathway for digital asset service providers rather than through the licensing process as originally proposed in Senate Bill No. 19. (4) Creating § 3556, which establishes procedures for the insolvency of a payment stablecoin issuer. (5) Creating a new definition of “control” to better align with the bill. (6) Expanding the definition of “registered public accounting firm” to include certified public accounting firms that meet the standards established by the Delaware Board of Accountancy. (7) Making appropriate technical corrections to conform to the standards of the Delaware Legislative Drafting Manual. Senate Substitute No. 2 for Senate Bill No. 19 establishes the Delaware Payment Stablecoin Act under Title 5 of the Delaware Code. It creates a licensing framework for payment stablecoin issuers and digital asset service providers operating with or on behalf of Delaware residents. The Act adopts definitions drawn from the federal Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act (GENIUS Act), Pub. L. 119-27, and from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency's proposed rulemaking implementing that statute (Docket ID OCC-2025-0372), where those definitions do not duplicate existing Delaware law. The Act establishes reserve requirements including reserve shortfall remediation cascades, mandatory redemption timing standards, capital standards, anti-money laundering obligations, data privacy statutory floors, change-in-control notice procedures, custody safeguards, a federal-to-state charter conversion pathway, and strong preemption provisions. The State Bank Commissioner is directed to promulgate implementing regulations within specified timeframes to align Delaware's framework with evolving federal standards. This Act requires a greater than majority vote for passage because § 1 of Article IX of the Delaware Constitution requires the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members elected to each house of the General Assembly to enact or amend the general incorporation law.
Reverse-keyword court orders enable the government to obtain technology search data without identifying any specific person as to which there is probable cause to believe they have committed or will imminently commit a crime. The profusion of electronic devices and apps in recent years has allowed recordation of numerous details of citizen’s everyday lives, that the government should not be permitted to collect and review at will. Such general searches allow the government to sweep in personal information about hundreds or thousands of people who are not suspected of having committed any crime. These searches are an invasion of privacy, have a potentially chilling effect on civil liberties, and sidestep requirements for individualized suspicion that are otherwise required for a lawful search. This House Substitute for House Bill No. 145 would prohibit law enforcement and courts from requesting, issuing, or enforcing reverse-keyword court orders and reverse-keyword requests, with the exception that reverse-keyword court orders and requests may be utilized to investigate suspected Class A Felonies so long as the search query returns 5 or fewer search hits. It also requires the suppression of evidence derived from an unlawful reverse-keyword search.
This Act imposes a moratorium, through January 31, 2027, on all applications and permits related to the development of large-scale data centers in this State. This Act requires a greater than majority vote for passage because § 1 of Article IX of the Delaware Constitution requires the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members elected to each house of the General Assembly to amend a municipal charter, whether directly, by amendment to a specific municipality’s charter, or as in this Act, indirectly by a general law.
This Act modernizes Delaware’s emergency communications infrastructure by transitioning the State’s legacy Enhanced 911 (E911) system to a Next Generation 911 (NG911) system and updating the funding structure needed to support a statewide emergency communications network. Delaware’s current E911 system is funded through a monthly surcharge of $0.60 per telephone line, which has remained unchanged since 2001. This Act also authorizes periodic adjustments or scheduled increases in the surcharge to account for inflation, technological upgrades, and the growing operational costs associated with maintaining a modern emergency communications system. The transition to NG911 will allow Delaware’s public safety answering points (PSAPs) to support modern communications technologies, including text-to-911, multimedia communications, improved geolocation capabilities, and enhanced data sharing with first responders. These capabilities require significant upgrades to network infrastructure, cybersecurity protections, geographic information systems (GIS), and redundancy to ensure reliability during emergencies. Revenue generated by the updated surcharge structure will be deposited into the 911 System Fund and used for costs associated with planning, deploying, operating, and maintaining the statewide NG911 system. Eligible expenditures include network infrastructure, call handling equipment, software systems, cybersecurity protections, GIS data management, training of emergency communications personnel, and other costs necessary to operate a modern statewide emergency communications system. By establishing a sustainable funding mechanism and enabling the transition to NG911, this Act ensures that Delaware’s emergency communications system can meet current and future public safety needs, improve response times, and provide residents with access to modern emergency communication capabilities. Finally, this Act makes technical changes to existing statutory language to conform with the Delaware Legislative Drafting Manual.
This Act gives Delaware’s Public Service Commission (“Commission”) the authority to designate a telecommunications provider or reseller as an eligible telecommunications carrier (“ETC”) for the purpose of providing Lifeline services. Lifeline is a Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) program that helps make phone and internet services more affordable for low-income consumers. Approximately 8,700 Delawareans participate in Lifeline. Currently, the determination of which telecommunications services companies can operate as Lifeline ETCs in Delaware is made by the FCC. This Act shifts that authority to the Commission, and in doing so, brings Delaware into line with nearly every other state in the nation. The reason for this nationwide trend is that in the past 15-20 years, the FCC has stopped taking action on approving ETCs for Lifeline on behalf of states. The FCC is not opposed to states stepping into this gap, but Delaware cannot do so absent statutory changes. By giving the Commission the authority to designate Lifeline ETCs, this Act will allow additional Lifeline providers to support this State’s residents. Because the FCC handles the administration and expenses of the program, there is no cost to the State as a result of taking on this authority. This Act takes effect immediately, but implementation is delayed to give the Commission time to amend its regulations to be consistent with this Act.
This Act provides a roadmap via an observational study on a small but representative group of diabetic patients to change standard healthcare from current reactive “sick care” to proactive “well care”. This will be accomplished by using a Delaware health system combined with a technology partner to regularly test, measure and manage, and incentivize diabetic patients and their providers to improve the health outcomes for Delawareans and drive down healthcare costs. The length of the observational study will be 3 years. During that time, data analysis will track results to determine if this Pilot Program shall be renewed and expanded. This Act requires no fiscal note in that this Pilot Program is to be federally funded through the Federal Rural Health Transformation Program.
Scams and fraud related to gift cards are rapidly becoming a major issue in the United States. The Federal Trade Commission reported more than 41,000 gift card fraud reports or $212 million in losses in 2024 with the final numbers for 2025 expected to be similar. With advancements in technology, these scams are becoming increasingly sophisticated and consequential for consumers. This Act sets forth the definitions and elements of crimes related to gift card theft. It establishes that a person is guilty of gift card theft if one of the following criteria is true (with the intent to defraud): 1. Acquires or retains possession of a gift card or gift card redemption information without the consent of the cardholder, card issuer, or gift card seller. 2. Alters or tampers with a gift card or the packaging in which it is offered for sale. 3. Devises a scheme to obtain a gift card or gift card redemption information that has been obtained in violation of paragraph (b)(1) or (2) of this section or as a result of a scheme described in paragraph (b)(3) of this section. 4. Uses, for the purpose of obtaining money, goods, services, or anything else of value, a gift card or gift card redemption information that has been obtained in violation of paragraph (b)(1) or (2) of this section or as a result of a scheme described in paragraph (b)(3) of this section. Lastly, this Act establishes that gift card theft is punishable under § 841(c) and § 841(d) of Title 11.
This Act amends Chapter 12B of Title 6 relating to Computer Security Breaches to clarify when businesses must provide notice of a computer security breach to the Attorney General.
Sections 1 and 2 of this Act identify DHIN as the State’s sanctioned provider of Health Data Utility (HDU) services. The HDU concept arises and builds off of services provided by Health Information Exchanges (HIEs) such as DHIN. Including this language will align with DHIN’s development and assist the State in responding to federal and other grant funding opportunities that require or prefer collaboration with a sanctioned HDU. Section 2 of this Act is a clarifying provision that states DHIN’s ability to contract with organizations in furtherance of its mission in business arrangements that facilitate DHIN’s underlying mission, notwithstanding that those organizations may provide services (such as direct provision of treatment to patients) that DHIN does not directly provide under this chapter. It also makes a technical change to align the list of stakeholders identified with lists that appear elsewhere in the statute. Section 3 of this Act aligns DHIN’s use cases more clearly with the requirements of federal law that relate to using health data for analytic and research purposes, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and the Federal Policy for Protection of Human Subjects (the Common Rule) and makes a technical correction to a description of DHIN processes. This change will also ensure consistency between permitted uses of claims data for research purposes and permitted uses of clinical data. Sections 4 and 5 clarify DHIN’s ability to incorporate clinically relevant information into a patient’s longitudinal record, excluding pricing information, for access as permitted by the laws and regulations governing DHIN’s HIE services. This clarification ensures patients will have access to the clinical information included in claims data for their own uses. Section 5 makes a technical correction to recognize that DHIN’s enabling legislation and applicable federal law do not permit DHIN to “report” data to the public that would be suitable for the public health improvement research and activities purposes designed to be encouraged by that section, and clarifies that the identified agencies will have access to the standardized claims data sets curated by DHIN from the Delaware Health Care Claims Database as otherwise permitted under this statute at no cost.
This House Substitute for House Bill No. 390 clarifies that the agencies may, in their discretion, determine the methodology to be used for bid submission, including limiting bidding to solely electronic submissions. This Act allows for electronic bidding to be conducted through a platform of the agency’s choice. Where electronic bidding is identified as the sole manner of bidding, the agency is not required to provide an anchor location for public attendance at the bid opening. The agency is then required to provide the results of the bidding in real time via an electronic remote hosting platform of the agency’s choosing. The agency must post the results of the solicitation to their website within 2 business days. Additionally, this Act clarifies that a newspaper advertisement is not required if advertisement is submitted to the electronic procurement advertising system defined in § 6902(12) of this title. Finally, this Act clarifies that the agency and awarded bidder may mutually consent to extend the time limit for a contract award. This House Substitute differs from the original bill by adding that the agency must accept paper submissions when the solicitation or request for proposal is under $500,000 but more than the amount specified by the Office of Management and Budget in their annual guidance. It includes that the centralized computer system administered by the Section of Government Support Services will serve as the State's system of record. This substitute also makes technical corrections to conform with the Delaware Legislative Drafting Manual.
