## Facts

- The Delaware Senate adopted Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 63, asking the Justices of the Delaware Supreme Court for an advisory opinion construing Article III, § 13 of the Delaware Constitution.
- Article III, § 13 permits the General Assembly, by a two‑thirds “bill of address” from each House, to request that the Governor remove certain public officers “for reasonable cause,” but the provision gives limited procedural detail.
- The Resolution posed five questions about: (1) whether “reasonable cause” may be based on a grand jury indictment without a conviction; (2) whether the Governor’s removal authority includes lesser measures such as suspension; (3) whether a hearing is required before either House votes on an address and what form it may take; (4) how § 13’s ten‑day notice requirement applies when both Houses act; and (5) whether there is a right to a direct appeal from the Governor’s removal decision.
- Because the request sought an advisory opinion, there was no lower‑court record and no adverse parties.
- The Justices appointed amici curiae to brief and help answer the General Assembly’s questions, then issued written answers addressing each question.

## Issues

1. May “reasonable cause” under Article III, § 13 include a grand jury indictment without a conviction, and is an indictment alone sufficient?
2. Does the Governor’s § 13 authority to “remove” a public officer include authority to impose a lesser measure, such as suspension, and may the Governor choose a lesser measure than removal requested in an address?
3. Does § 13 require a hearing before either House votes on a bill of address, and if so, may the hearing occur in the first House only or in a joint hearing?
4. How does § 13’s “ten days’ notice” requirement apply to the hearing/voting sequence in the two chambers?
5. Does § 13 provide a right to a direct appeal from the Governor’s removal decision?

## Decision

- “Reasonable cause” for a bill of address may include the fact of an indictment, but an indictment standing alone is not sufficient to establish reasonable cause.
- The Governor’s authority under Article III, § 13 is limited to removal and does not include a lesser measure such as suspension.
- A hearing is required before a vote on a bill of address.
- The hearing requirement may be satisfied by a hearing in the first House or by a joint hearing conducted for both Houses.
- The ten‑day notice requirement is read to ensure meaningful advance notice tied to the hearing opportunity and legislative action, not as a rigid demand for duplicative notice periods absent multiple hearings.
- Article III, § 13 does not create a special right to a direct appeal from the Governor’s removal decision; any court review, if available, would arise through ordinary legal channels rather than a § 13 appeal mechanism.

## Legal Principles

- A grand jury indictment can be considered in deciding whether “reasonable cause” exists under Article III, § 13, but the General Assembly must exercise its own judgment and may not treat indictment as automatically establishing reasonable cause.
- Where the Constitution specifies a particular consequence (removal), the Governor may not expand that power to include different sanctions (such as suspension) without constitutional text granting that authority.
- Because removal from office is a serious governmental action, Article III, § 13 requires basic procedural fairness: advance notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard before the legislature votes on an address.
- Article III, § 13 does not mandate separate hearings in each House; one adequate hearing—either in the first House or jointly—can satisfy the hearing requirement.
- The bill‑of‑address procedure is a constitutional mechanism assigned to the political branches and does not carry a built‑in route for direct appellate review of the Governor’s resulting removal decision.

## Conclusion

In this advisory opinion responding to Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 63, the Delaware Justices construed Article III, § 13 to require a fair pre‑address hearing with timely notice, to permit consideration of an indictment without treating it as conclusive proof of reasonable cause, to limit the Governor’s authority to removal (not suspension or other lesser measures), and to recognize no special direct appeal from a § 13 removal decision.


Request for an Opinion of the Justices, 274 A.3d 269 (2022)