Strengthening Civil Rights Enforcement in Connecticut

by William Tong

At a time of increased anxiety and concern over widespread discrimination, hate crimes, and civil rights violations, Connecticut needs to take a stand. We can do that by passing Senate Bill 363.

This bill brings Connecticut into line with our sister states by formalizing the Attorney General’s ability to investigate and – where the evidence warrants – bring civil rights lawsuits to stop large-scale, systematic violations of existing constitutional and statutory rights.

We have important civil rights protections on the books – like the Fair Housing Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and our state hate crimes provisions. But rights are only as meaningful as the remedies that we create for them.

(This bill) does not create any new substantive rights. It does not grant the Attorney General any criminal jurisdiction. Instead, it authorizes the Attorney General to use civil actions to enforce civil rights that have already been recognized by this legislature and by Congress.

Across the Country, States Are Stepping Up to Protect Civil Rights

Our ability to protect the civil rights of Connecticut residents is constrained because Connecticut lacks a statute explicitly recognizing the Attorney General's role in civil rights enforcement. We are an outlier compared to our neighboring states of New York, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island – all of which are among at least 22 states, ranging geographically and politically from Washington to Florida, that have recognized the authority of their Attorneys General to use civil litigation to combat discrimination, protect fundamental freedoms, and stand up for vulnerable residents.

The trend is towards action, as states increasingly have realized that they can and must play a key role in protecting the rights of their residents. For example, Washington launched its civil rights division in 2015, New Hampshire in 2017, and Virginia in 2021. When civil rights violations take place just across the state line in New York or Massachusetts, the Attorney General can respond. Our residents' rights deserve the same level of protection here in Connecticut.

“The trend is towards action, as states increasingly have realized that they can and must play a key role in protecting the rights of their residents.”

Senate Bill 363 clarifies the Attorney General's standing to conduct civil rights investigations and – where appropriate – initiate civil actions seeking damages and injunctions against bad actors who intimidate, discriminate, harass, and threaten our civil rights and freedoms. The bill is patterned after some of our sister states’ most important and time-tested civil rights enforcement laws:

Section 1 positions the Attorney General to respond to hate crimes with civil suits for injunctions and damages. As we have discussed and agreed with the State’s Attorney, SB 363 would not give the Attorney General criminal jurisdiction. The language here closely tracks Massachusetts’ civil hate crimes enforcement law, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 12 § 11h.

Section 2 authorizes the Attorney General to sue on behalf of groups of individuals who have suffered from a pattern or practice civil rights violations. This subsection is intended to grant authority that parallels the New York Attorney General’s powers under New York Executive Law § 63(12).

Importantly, engaging in civil rights work – which the Office can do within existing appropriations – is entirely consistent with the Attorney General's existing responsibilities. The Attorney General is the people's lawyer, responsible for using the law to fight in civil cases for the rights, freedoms, and interests of Connecticut's people and its government. Sometimes, that means protecting the state in litigation that threatens to divert taxpayer dollars. And sometimes it means using government's power to protect our residents against civil rights violations.

Complementing Existing Civil Rights Work

(The legislation would) position the Attorney General's Office to leverage its unique expertise and capacity as Connecticut's largest law firm to complement important ongoing civil rights enforcement efforts. The Office looks forward to actively partnering with our state's civil rights organizations and stakeholders in opportunities to advance and protect rights through litigation and policy development.

In particular, we look forward to further strengthening our partnership with the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (CHRO), even as we each have our own area of expertise and focus. As a rule, the CHRO holds administrative hearings in response to individual complaints of discrimination. The CHRO's legal staff investigates and prosecutes CHRO cases – and that tradition should and will continue upon passage of this bill. SB 363 contains multiple provisions, which we discussed and agreed on with the CHRO, to reduce the threat of duplicative litigation and ensure that the CHRO’s enforcement capacity remains robust and independent.

Protecting the Rights of All Connecticut Residents

Senate Bill 363 positions the Attorney General’s Office to respond meaningfully to some of the most pressing issues of our day. We need to be able to investigate and – where appropriate – act when, to cite just a few recent examples from the news:

The Islamic Center in New London receives fake poison in the mail, or Klansmen ride in Stafford Springs.
African American and Latinx people in Hartford are denied safe, quality housing while the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development sits on its hands.
Immigrants in our cities and towns are subjected to large-scale, systematic wage theft.
Connecticut residents with disabilities fear being pushed out of jobs because a big box store has decided to reclassify their position without accommodation.

These are the kinds of threats to civil rights faced by people across Connecticut. And they are situations where investigation and civil action by a large, experienced law office are important to bringing justice and healing communities.

“The Constitution State should continue to stake our claim as a leader in protecting rights.”

We cannot predict exactly what situations might call for intervention and enforcement by the Attorney General. But it may be helpful to look at some of the ways that Attorneys General in other states have enforced civil rights:

• Religious Rights: The Washington Attorney General reached a settlement that required the payment of damages and a change to hiring practices after an investigation revealed that an aerospace company "refused to hire Muslim applicants, engaged in religious and/or national origin harassment, discriminated against employees based on marital status, and retaliated against employees who opposed such unfair practices."

• Disability Rights: The California Attorney General entered into a settlement agreement with the University of Southern California, a private research university, to improve access to its campus transportation system for individuals with disabilities following an investigation into allegations that the transportation system failed to comply with state and federal law.

• Racial Discrimination: The Washington State Attorney General signed an agreement with Facebook that legally binds the company to block the use of its ad-targeting tools to discriminate based on race, religion, sexual orientation, and other protected classes.

• Gender Discrimination: The New York Attorney General partnered with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to reach a settlement with Con Edison over gender discrimination and sexual harassment against women in field positions. Under the terms of the agreement, Con Edison agreed to reserve up to $3.8 million to be distributed among eligible settlement group members; hired an independent consultant to evaluate compliance; and provided training on sex discrimination and harassment.

• Workers' Rights: In Massachusetts last year, the Attorney General won restitution exceeding $1.47 million for more than 1,030 employees who had been subjected to wage theft, and the companies were fined a total of more than $1.23 million.

Today, I ask you to join me in sending a clear message to victims of civil rights abuses across Connecticut: The Office of the Attorney General is your advocate, and we are on your side. The Constitution State should continue to stake our claim as a leader in protecting rights. Senate Bill 363 is a step towards fulfilling our government's promise and responsibility to protect our residents. Thank you once again for the opportunity to offer testimony on this incredibly important bill, and please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns.