VermontVermont law lets people sue over federal constitutional rights violations
People in Vermont may seek court redress when someone acting under government authority deprives them of rights protected by the U.S. Constitution.
What it does
People whose federal constitutional rights are deprived by someone acting under government authority may seek redress in court. Federal civil rights defenses also apply.
Argument forPeople whose federal constitutional rights are deprived may seek redress in court from the person responsible.
Argument againstOfficials could face lawsuits over constitutional rights claims, which may take time and resources to answer.
More detail
A person whose federal constitutional rights are deprived by someone acting under government authority may seek redress in court. This covers any person in Vermont’s jurisdiction whose rights under the U.S. Constitution are deprived under a law, rule, custom, or practice of the United States, a state or territory, or the District of Columbia. Defenses available under federal civil rights law also apply. A court may not order a judge to take or stop an action done in the judge’s judicial role unless a court order was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. The law took effect on July 1, 2026.
Where do you stand?
Choose your position
Tell your reps
Take a position to see your representatives and ways to contact them.
Where it stands
- Introduced
- Passed 1st Chamber
- Passed 2nd Chamber
- To Governor
- Became Law
Looking ahead
No hearings or votes scheduled.
History
- 2026
- Apr 29House message: Governor allowed to become law without signature on April 27, 2026Latest
- Apr 28Allowed to become law without the signature of the Governor on April 27, 2026
- Apr 21Delivered to Governor on April 21, 2026To Governor
- Apr 16Senate Message: Passed in concurrenceMajor
- Apr 15Read 3rd time & passed in concurrencePassed 2nd Chamber
- Apr 15New Business/Third ReadingMinor
- Apr 14Roll Call, Requested by Sen. Vyhovsky
- Vote recorded 3rd reading ordered on roll call Passed -- Needed 15 of 30 to Pass -- Yeas = 23, Nays = 7. Result: pass.Upper
- Apr 143rd reading ordered on roll call Passed -- Needed 15 of 30 to Pass -- Yeas = 23, Nays = 7
- Apr 14Reported favorably by Senator Hashim for Committee on JudiciaryMinor
- Apr 14Read 2nd timeMinor
- Apr 14Favorable report by Committee on JudiciaryMinor
- Apr 14Second ReadingMinor
- Apr 10Favorable report by Committee on JudiciaryMinor
- Apr 10Second ReadingMinor
- Apr 10Entered on Notice Calendar
- Mar 18Read 1st time & referred to Committee on JudiciaryMinor
- Mar 13Read third time and passedPassed 1st Chamber
- Mar 13Action Calendar: Third ReadingMinor
- Mar 12Third Reading orderedMinor
- Vote recorded Which was agreed to on a Roll Call Passed -- Needed 68 of 136 to Pass -- Yeas = 97, Nays = 39. Result: pass.Lower
- Mar 12Which was agreed to on a Roll Call Passed -- Needed 68 of 136 to Pass -- Yeas = 97, Nays = 39
- Mar 12Report of Committee on Judiciary agreed to
- Mar 12Rep. Houghton of Essex Junction demanded yeas and nays
- Mar 12Rep. LaLonde of South Burlington reported for the Committee on Judiciary
- Mar 12Read second timeMinor
- Mar 12Action Calendar: Favorable with Amendment
- Mar 11Notice Calendar: Favorable with Amendment
- Mar 10Notice Calendar: Favorable with Amendment
- Feb 3Read first time and referred to the Committee on JudiciaryIntroduced
Civil Rights & Voting