Latest news with #SB21
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Down to the wire: Texas lawmakers OK bills on handgun licenses, cryptocurrency, AI abuses
As the clock ticks down to the June 2 final adjournment of the 2025 legislative session, lawmakers are scrambling to pass — or kill — the bills that have been stacked up for weeks. Here's some of the action at the Capitol on Wednesday. The House finally passed and sent to Gov. Greg Abbott legislation to formally recognize in Texas any handgun license issued in other states. Senate Bill 706 would end the requirement for the governor to negotiate agreements with other states before Texas will accept the licenses. Abbott, a three-term Republican who has signed numerous laws expanding gun rights, is expected to sign the bill. The House gave final approval to Senate-passed legislation to establish the Texas Bitcoin Reserve, which would be administered by the Texas comptroller. The fund will contain Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies with a market capitalization of at least $500 billion. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick made SB 21 a priority in the upper chamber, following up on President Donald Trump's pledge to make the United States "the cryptocurrency capital of the world." The measure now returns to the Senate for members to consider the modifications made to the bill in the House. A bill that would provide more protections for migrant workers who might otherwise be forced to live in substandard housing was sent to the governor's desk. According to the Legislature's analysis of SB 243, the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs historically has lacked the resources to investigate allegations of substandard housing. Complicating matters is that "migrant laborers are often reluctant to report violations or collect damages related to substandard housing conditions because of fear of retaliation," according to the analysis. The legislation "seeks to address this issue by strengthening the TDHCA penalty structure for violations of provisions governing migrant labor housing facilities and by providing for increased accountability and enforcement of those provisions," the analysis said. A bill to outlaw AI-generated child sexual abuse material passed the House without opposition in a move that lawmakers said will give police more effective tools to crack down on child exploitation. SB 20 by Sen. Pete Flores, R-Pleasanton, would criminalize the possession of obscene material appearing to depict a child, "regardless of whether the depiction is an image of an actual child, a cartoon or animation, or an image created using an artificial intelligence application or other computer software." Under the proposal, the offense would be a state jail felony but a charge could be upgraded for previous convictions. The Senate will need to agree to a House amendment on the bill before it heads to the governor's desk for a signature. The Senate sent to the governor's desk legislation to assess whether veterans face unreasonable obstacles in securing burial space in the system of state-run cemeteries for those veterans. House Bill 1875 requires a panel of senators and state representatives to study the matter and make recommendations to eliminate any such barriers. The Texas General Land Office manages five veterans cemeteries around the state. A bill that would require Texas public schools to display the Ten Commandments in every classroom suffered a procedural setback when a point of order halted discussion on the proposal in the House. SB 10 is one of the latest battles in the Christian right's pursuit of religion in schools and to confront the longstanding principle of separation of church and state. The bill is a priority for Patrick, whose Senate passed it along strict party lines in March. The point of order was brought by Austin Democratic Rep. James Talarico, a former teacher who is a Christian and an outspoken critic of Christian nationalism. He had found a procedural flaw that delayed but likely will not derail the bill. SB 10 will now head back to the House Committee on Public Education for correction but will likely be considered again in a future floor session. This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Texas lawmakers OK bills on handgun licenses, cryptocurrency, AI abuses
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Down to the wire: Texas lawmakers OK bills on handgun licenses, cryptocurrency, AI abuses
As the clock ticks down to the June 2 final adjournment of the 2025 legislative session, lawmakers are scrambling to pass — or kill — the bills that have been stacked up for weeks. Here's some of the action at the Capitol on Wednesday. The House finally passed and sent to Gov. Greg Abbott legislation to formally recognize in Texas any handgun license issued in other states. Senate Bill 706 would end the requirement for the governor to negotiate agreements with other states before Texas will accept the licenses. Abbott, a three-term Republican who has signed numerous laws expanding gun rights, is expected to sign the bill. The House gave final approval to Senate-passed legislation to establish the Texas Bitcoin Reserve, which would be administered by the Texas comptroller. The fund will contain Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies with a market capitalization of at least $500 billion. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick made SB 21 a priority in the upper chamber, following up on President Donald Trump's pledge to make the United States "the cryptocurrency capital of the world." The measure now returns to the Senate for members to consider the modifications made to the bill in the House. A bill that would provide more protections for migrant workers who might otherwise be forced to live in substandard housing was sent to the governor's desk. According to the Legislature's analysis of SB 243, the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs historically has lacked the resources to investigate allegations of substandard housing. Complicating matters is that "migrant laborers are often reluctant to report violations or collect damages related to substandard housing conditions because of fear of retaliation," according to the analysis. The legislation "seeks to address this issue by strengthening the TDHCA penalty structure for violations of provisions governing migrant labor housing facilities and by providing for increased accountability and enforcement of those provisions," the analysis said. A bill to outlaw AI-generated child sexual abuse material passed the House without opposition in a move that lawmakers said will give police more effective tools to crack down on child exploitation. SB 20 by Sen. Pete Flores, R-Pleasanton, would criminalize the possession of obscene material appearing to depict a child, "regardless of whether the depiction is an image of an actual child, a cartoon or animation, or an image created using an artificial intelligence application or other computer software." Under the proposal, the offense would be a state jail felony but a charge could be upgraded for previous convictions. The Senate will need to agree to a House amendment on the bill before it heads to the governor's desk for a signature. The Senate sent to the governor's desk legislation to assess whether veterans face unreasonable obstacles in securing burial space in the system of state-run cemeteries for those veterans. House Bill 1875 requires a panel of senators and state representatives to study the matter and make recommendations to eliminate any such barriers. The Texas General Land Office manages five veterans cemeteries around the state. A bill that would require Texas public schools to display the Ten Commandments in every classroom suffered a procedural setback when a point of order halted discussion on the proposal in the House. SB 10 is one of the latest battles in the Christian right's pursuit of religion in schools and to confront the longstanding principle of separation of church and state. The bill is a priority for Patrick, whose Senate passed it along strict party lines in March. The point of order was brought by Austin Democratic Rep. James Talarico, a former teacher who is a Christian and an outspoken critic of Christian nationalism. He had found a procedural flaw that delayed but likely will not derail the bill. SB 10 will now head back to the House Committee on Public Education for correction but will likely be considered again in a future floor session. This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Texas lawmakers OK bills on handgun licenses, cryptocurrency, AI abuses
Yahoo
26-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Delaware passes law designed to stop more Elon Musks from leaving state
Delaware lawmakers this week pushed through controversial changes governing corporate behavior in a scramble to keep more businesses from leaving the state following the dramatic exit of Elon Musk. Gov. Matthew Meyer signed the SB 21 legislation into law Tuesday and said the changes would maintain Delaware's place as the best place in the world to incorporate a business — "ensuring clarity and predictability, balancing the interests of stockholders and corporate boards." The revisions came in response to a string of complaints from prominent CEOs, including Tesla (TSLA) CEO Musk, who moved incorporations out of state or threatened to do so. The exits even gained a nickname: "Dexits.' Musk has already moved the incorporations of Tesla and his rocket-building company SpaceX ( to Texas. Neuralink ( Boring and the social media platform X — three other companies he oversees — have left for Nevada. Over the past year, Meta (META), Dropbox (DBX), hedge fund Pershing Square Capital Management, Trade Desk (TTD), Fidelity National Financial (FNF), and Sonoma Pharmaceuticals (SNOA) have all floated plans to move their incorporations. The talk of high-profile departures is roiling a state that, for roughly the past century, has been the dominant place to incorporate because of its so-called corporate-friendly laws, specialized business courts, and ease of filing company documents. The state touts that it is home to more than two-thirds of all Fortune 500 companies. In 2023, Delaware hit a record 2 million total incorporations but saw a drop in the percentage of Fortune 500 companies registered there to 67.6% from 68.2% in 2022. The state's newly elected Democratic governor, Meyer, launched a working group to study mounting complaints, and lawmakers rushed to push through a bill that would limit investor lawsuits by allowing corporate boards to further insulate their directors, officers, and controlling shareholders from liability. Musk decided to leave the state after a controversial decision by a Delaware judge to wipe out his $56 billion performance-based compensation plan. He is now appealing that decision. The billionaire, along with current and former Tesla directors, argued in a recent appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court that the refusal by Delaware Chancery Court judge Kathaleen McCormick to reinstate Musk's pay contained multiple errors that should lead to the ruling's reversal. The new law passed this week by the state legislature and signed by the governor extends more leeway to board members in transactions where their interests or relationships raise conflicts of interest. It also broadens the set of conditions that investors must meet before inspecting company records, making it more difficult for plaintiffs to find evidence supporting a lawsuit. Semafor reported that the legislation was prompted by warnings from key corporate attorneys that more big-name companies, including Walmart (WMT), might move out of the state. Critics say the amendments amount to a handout for billionaires because they broaden safe harbor protections for corporate directors. They also object to the legislation being put to a vote without more deliberation. Columbia University School of Law professors criticized Delaware lawmakers for pushing what they describe as major overhauls so quickly. 'Ordinarily, reforms of this magnitude pass through the deliberate, consensus-driven process of the Delaware Bar's Corporation Law Council. This time, however, the route appears more compressed,' the lawyers said. Eric Talley, one of the Columbia University law professors who co-authored the critique, said parts of the new law may be vulnerable to state constitutional challenges. "I suspect a challenge to be made imminently," Talley said. He added that the most serious consequence for investors under the new rules is that they have less protection against actions by insiders — officers, directors, and especially large stockholders — that attempt to funnel assets away from outside investors and into the pockets of the insiders. Alexis Keenan is a legal reporter for Yahoo Finance. Follow Alexis on X @alexiskweed. Click here for in-depth analysis of the latest stock market news and events moving stock prices Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
26-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
We protected Delaware's future: Debunking the false 'controversy' around SB 21
In response to legitimate concerns from the national business and legal community, leaders of the Delaware General Assembly introduced bipartisan legislation that restores the balance between fairness and efficiency that has enabled Delaware to claim its role as the preeminent jurisdiction for incorporation. The Senate voted 20 to 0 in favor of the legislation, which was then sent to the House Judiciary Committee, from which it emerged with a vote of 9 to 2 in favor. Gov. Matt Meyer has signed the legislation. The state's legal and business community has rallied around the legislation, which reflects the input from Delaware's Corporation Law Council, a body composed of prominent Delaware corporate attorneys with a wide range of experience that is advocating for its passage. The Corporation Law Section of the Delaware bar endorsed the legislation by a 74% margin. Several former Delaware judges have publicly spoken in favor of the legislation, citing the need for clarity and predictability in the core areas of Delaware corporate law over which they have collectively spent decades presiding. Delaware-based law firms that have practiced in the state for decades (and in some cases more than a century) and that collectively employ more than 1350 employees in Delaware have been unwavering in their support of the legislation. These firms, whose interests are uniquely aligned with the state, are actively promoting its passage as a means of burnishing Delaware's global reputation in the broader corporate system. Delaware's trade groups also recognize how critical the legislation is to maintaining Delaware's corporate franchise. Non-profit organizations, including the Delaware Volunteer Firefighters' Association, Christiana Care, the Delaware Healthcare Association and the Delaware Alliance for Nonprofit Advancement, stand alongside thousands of Delaware businesses and trade groups. These include the Delaware State Chamber of Commerce, the Delaware Business Roundtable, the New Castle County Chamber of Commerce, the Rehoboth-Dewey Chamber of Commerce, the Central Delaware Chamber of Commerce, the Kent Sussex Leadership Alliance, the Homebuilders Association of Delaware, the Delaware Hotel & Lodging Association, and the Delaware Restaurant Association. All have voiced their support. Opinion: Delaware is in a fight for our role as America's incorporation king. We must win Why, then, is the legislation being characterized, in paid-for advertisements, in op-ed pieces and in some media coverage, as 'controversial'? The answer is simple: a small but well-funded alliance of stockholder plaintiffs' lawyers in the corporate bar view the legislation as a threat to the massive contingency fees they seek to collect, whether in the form of judgments or settlement payments, whenever they sue Delaware corporations or their directors and officers. The yard signs and mass mailings decrying 'SB 21' are not evidence of widespread opposition to the legislation. Rather, they reflect the profligate spending of well-healed stockholder plaintiffs' lawyers on an astroturf political campaign. The corporate plaintiffs' firms that have voiced opposition to the legislation do not have Delaware's best interest at heart. Indeed, most of the lawyers who work at these firms reside out of state. Collectively, they employ fewer than 70 lawyers in Delaware. To the extent they have offices in Delaware (many do not), they were in most cases opened only very recently — within the last five to 10 years — and are merely outposts of much larger offices in New York and other cities, where the real decisions are made and where the lucrative settlement payments and fee awards are principally funneled. That these firms, in coordinating their opposition to the legislation, are using an expensive lobbyist from Washington, D.C. demonstrates their lack of ties to Delaware. Nevertheless, by wielding a massive (and massively expensive) campaign to mischaracterize the legislation and the intent of the drafters, these firms have tried to spin the legislation as 'controversial,' creating the false impression that the legislation faces widespread opposition. Why? Because they believe the legislation threatens the massive fees they've been able to extract at the expense of the stockholders they purport to represent. In the past five years alone, 'stockholder' plaintiffs' firms have received fee awards exceeding $1 billion. Most of the firms that have received these fees have less than ten lawyers in Delaware. These are the primary opponents to SB 21. Why are these firms misbranding the common-sense corporate legislation widely supported by Delaware law firms and businesses as a 'billionaire's bill'? To protect their own fees. As the expression goes, that's quite rich indeed. These plaintiffs' firms will feverishly resist any reforms to Delaware law that jeopardize their eye-popping fees, even if doing so risks a mass exodus of corporations from Delaware. Why? Because they don't need to be in Delaware. If corporations reincorporated, en masse, to other jurisdictions, the plaintiffs' firms would follow them. Again, most of the attorneys at these firms aren't currently in Delaware to begin with. In short, lawyers and businesses who actually live and operate in Delaware have an interest in ensuring that the state remains strong and prosperous. And these Delaware firms and businesses overwhelmingly support the legislation, precisely because it is balanced and essential for a strong and prosperous state. Andrew M. Lubin, president of Delaware Financial Group and 25-year member of the Delaware Economic and Financial Advisory Counci, or DEFAC. This article originally appeared on Delaware SB 21 protects First State's future | Opinion
Miami Herald
26-03-2025
- Business
- Miami Herald
Elon Musk railed against Delaware. Now some in the state are pushing a bill that could slow suits against controlling shareholders
Elon Musk seems to be everywhere this month, between firing federal workers for President Donald Trump, and news at his companies Tesla, SpaceX, and X. And his image is all over political mailers in Delaware, as part of a high-stakes but intensely local lobbying campaign over a piece of proposed state legislation. Senate Bill 21 would make it tougher for small groups of shareholders to sue controlling shareholders like Musk or Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg for alleged conflicts of interest. That could make it easier, for example, for Musk to collect the $50 billion-plus pay package twice blocked by the court's top Chancery judge, Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick. Or it could help Zuckerberg sink an attempt to make Meta pay its shareholders for the billions it was fined for illegally sharing customer information. The bill was approved by the state Senate, but stalled in the House after a proposed amendment that would require each company to get shareholder approval before adopting the SB21 changes. The House is scheduled to take up the bill again Tuesday. What's at stake? The struggle is over corporate law changes, backed by new Gov. Matt Meyer, state Senate leaders, and local and national law partners representing big companies. They say the legislation would preserve Delaware's lucrative status as "America's Corporate Capital" and $2 billion in yearly corporate fees, a third of the state's budget. Critics, who include activist investors, pension plans, corporate governance scholars and some of Meyer's fellow Democrats, say the state and its business-friendly Chancery Court risk losing their legal integrity to a Musk-backed corporate coup. Why corporations love Delaware In 1899, Delaware passed a business-friendly incorporation law, which it kept in place as other states were restricting corporations. Ever since, Delaware has been a reliable place to incorporate at low fees, and settle business disputes fast and with minimal fuss. More than half of publicly traded companies and more than 60% of the Fortune 500 are incorporated in Delaware, the state says. Wilmington is home to branch offices of big New York, Washington and Philadelphia law firms, and homegrown firms that specialize in Chancery cases. The Court of Chancery itself is an attraction, run by governor-appointed corporate lawyers. These chancellors and vice chancellors are specialized judges, working without juries, who can quickly settle fights among shareholders and managers. The state's corporate rules are fine-tuned annually by way of legislation shaped by corporate and investor lawyers, and those changes are rarely controversial. This year it's different. Is business really fleeing Delaware? Even with Tesla making good on Musk's threat to quit Delaware for Texas, and Meta also threatening to leave, many companies are moving their legal business into Delaware. Among U.S. startups last year, 89% were incorporated under Delaware law, Columbia law professor Dorothy Lund said Feb. 24, at a conference in New York sponsored by the University of Delaware's corporate governance program. Lund said the lawsuit restrictions in Senate Bill 21 are mostly of interest to a small group of companies whose bosses are also controlling shareholders, like Musk and Zuckerberg are. "I don't think this is the story of a huge threat," Lund said. "Yet we have a big reaction." Gov. Meyer says corporate fee collections are higher this year than last. But Meyer worries the complaints by powerful CEOs like Musk, and perception by more mainstream companies that Delaware has become too friendly to plaintiffs lawyers and activists, could in time drive away business and hurt state revenues. Who's not happy with the Chancery Court? Phil Shawe, cofounder of the billion-dollar legal-translation company TransPerfect, had been so upset by Chancery rulings in a yearslong dispute over the company's value that he has funded a campaign of public attacks on Chancery and the Delaware "establishment" as "corrupt." Last year Shawe spent $1.25 million on a PAC that campaigned against Delaware's Lt. Gov. Bethany Hall-Long in the Democratic primary. That helped enable Meyer to take over the state's top job. By then, Shawe's campaign wasn't so lonely. In 2022, Delaware's top Chancery judge, Kathaleen McCormick, rejected Musk's attempts to back out of a contract to buy the social media platform Twitter, now known as X. Then in 2024 she twice ruled that the Tesla board's plan to grant him over $50 billion in stock was illegal because the company failed to show it was in outside shareholders' best interest. McCormick wouldn't budge even when a majority of shareholders, including Vanguard Group, approved the payout. Musk fulminated against Delaware on X then moved his companies' legal homes out of the state. He steered Tesla to Texas, which has lately established business courts in its major cities. McCormick also ruled against Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg's 2017 attempt to transfer shares to his children while still controlling their vote. Meta now faces another Chancery complaint, by a group of pension funds, demanding compensation for Facebook's illegal sharing of customer data. Old commandment, new vibes At its roots, "corporate law is simple: 'Though shalt not steal,'" said Sean Griffith, a law professor at Fordham University. He compared past Delaware cases to "morality plays" in which judges reviewed whether boards had done enough to ensure shareholders' interests were protected. But ruling against Musk's billions even after shareholders endorsed the payout may be "logically compelling but politically untenable," Griffith added. New York University law professor Edward Rock, a longtime scholar of the Delaware court, suggested the Senate bill is a reaction to a recent "vibe" that Delaware's reputation for "sophisticated courts with business acumen" has suffered. Rich company founders find it "outrageous to be told they can't take big money" without meeting extra court-ordered conditions. Rock worried about the "rushed" attempt to fix these perceptions by restricting judges' powers through legal limits. The more law is spelled out on the books, not left to veteran Chancery judges' discretion, the easier for competing states to copy, he added, removing Delaware's competitive advantage. Who's for it? The bill was drafted in the offices of Delaware's leading corporate law firm, Richards, Layton & Finger, one of several that represented Musk in Delaware litigation. Gov. Meyer, after consulting corporate lawyers, is telling residents the law must be passed to preserve the state's ability to continue without a retail sales tax. He warned against opponents' "misinformation." Meyer's stance marks a departure from state officials' usual reticence about corporate law. "The Governor faced very intense pressure," said Lawrence Cunningham, head of the University of Delaware's corporate governance center, at the New York event. "He did something most governors haven't: He exercised leadership." The bill is backed by an influential legal trio: William Chandler, a former top Chancery Court judge who now works a leading Silicon Valley's law firm, Wilson Sonsini; Leo E. Strine, a former Delaware Chief Justice, who once toured Ivy League law schools campaigning for "fair and sustainable business practices"; and Lawrence Hamermesh, professor emeritus at Widener University, Delaware's only law school. Who's against? The bill's critics included Charles Elson, a Delaware-based corporate-governance adviser. "This isn't good for Delaware, or for capital markets," said Elson, before testifying against the bill at a Dover hearing. Some of the corporate law scholars who specialize in governance issues have also come out against it. Elson predicted the bill would convince some shareholders to avoid Delaware because they would lose the power to protest self-serving CEO decisions. Activist public-pension funds and hedge-fund investors, plaintiff's lawyer groups and consumer organizations urged Delaware representatives to resist the bill. _____ Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
