The Virgin Islands Senate Rules and Judiciary Committee voted Thursday to send two bills, one on firearms and another on hemp, back to committee for further amendments, with six senators in favor and only Sen. Carla J. Joseph opposed.

The majority of the committee emphasized the need for further refinement of the bills before moving forward. Several senators cited requests from the bill sponsors themselves, as well as feedback from the public, as reasons to send the bill back.

Sen. Milton E. Potter explained his support for the referral, saying, “In communicating with the bill sponsor, the bill sponsor advised me that … based on the information he received from many of you in this audience today, he opted to make some significant amendments to his legislation, so the bill really will not look the same as it looks today.”

“If the prime sponsor of a bill advises you that I would like the bill to be held because it is not ripe to be heard, it needs to be amended. The common practice is to hold a bill and allow the sponsor an opportunity to make the necessary adjustment that he requested,” He continued.

Potter made clear that his vote was not an attempt to obfuscate. “It’s not an attempt to usurp anything or to sneak anything through. This is a bill that’s going to be impossible to quote, unquote, sneak through. Right? I’m a licensed gun owner myself, and I respect everybody’s right to bear arms. I do, but specifically this bill, we all recognize needed significant adjustments. And that is what the bill sponsor indicated. He recognized the deficiency with the bill. And he’s saying, give me time to fix it.”

Collectively, the majority of senators framed their votes as a commitment to give the bill sponsors more time for amendments and to ensure the legislative process remains thorough and inclusive. A few expressed dissatisfaction with the decision by Joseph.

Sen. Kenneth L Gittens, who made the motion to refer the bills back, said the intent was “to allow the committee of jurisdiction to have additional time to go back and refine the proposed amendments before the bill proceeds forward in the legislative process.”

“It’s a crying shame that my colleague would do such a thing to put it on the backs of the members of this committee fully well knowing that she received information in writing from the bill sponsor asking that the measure not be placed on the agenda, to give him ample time to address the amendments needed,” he added.

Sen. Alma Francis Heyliger echoed the need for more work, stating, “We communicated with them, and it is because of these conversations that we decided to send it back, because we understand their concerns, we understand the constitutionality, we understand the issues with the medical and the health issues that potentially might come across when it comes to the hemp and these gun laws.”

“So we collectively made a decision to do so, and we had one colleague on her own, even though we told her we want to send it back to make sure we do our best to not make criminals out of law-abiding citizens, to make sure the laws are going to be best serving the people of this territory. One person on their own … she did what she wanted to do,” she added.

The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Clifford A Joseph, said he plans to hold a hearing on Oct. 17 and encouraged individuals to share their input. “I am open. I am listening to all my colleagues, and I’m listening to individuals in the public as well,” Joseph said. “But we are lawmakers, and at the end of the day, we have to bring forward what’s in the best interest of the people. I have not denied anybody the chance to put their information forward for us to listen to.”

He added that he is continuing to refine the measure. “I will say again, I’m looking forward to getting my amendments from legal counsel and making the adjustments that are needed to move these bills forward. It will happen.”

Sen. Angel L. Bolques Jr. also addressed the audience, saying his vote was intended to return the measure to the committee for further review.

“My vote was to take it back to the committee of jurisdiction, which I’m a member of, to have my opportunity to vet the bill thoroughly before we come to this juncture,” Bolques said. “So I do appreciate each and every one of you for coming out here today.”

He acknowledged that while there would be no testimony on the bills that day, the discussion still served an important purpose.

“I apologize that it may seem like time wasted, but I believe this discussion, even though it may have felt a little back and forth, was still healthy for you to have today,” Bolques said. “So that you may all go back to your daily lives knowing that we’re going to be doing our part 110% to make sure the next time you take a look at this bill, it looks a lot more like it should.”

Joseph, the lone dissenting vote, voiced strong disappointment with the committee’s decision to send the bills back without hearing from the public and scheduled testifiers.

She noted that any senator, especially a chairperson, has the right to hold meetings like this one. “It is very well in order, according to our rules,” Joseph said. She added that, as chair, she had communicated with all involved and followed proper procedures but ultimately objected to what she viewed as a missed opportunity for open debate and public input.

She argued that many residents, including representatives from the Attorney General’s Office, had taken time to attend the hearing and deserved the opportunity to speak. To underscore the level of public interest, Joseph requested that the livestream show the gallery of attendees, highlighting the strong community presence at the meeting.

“Show the gallery here, of the persons who came out today, show the gallery. This is a full amount of our residents who pay our salaries and work hard. We have representation here from the Attorney General’s Office, and not to allow them to have an opportunity and to dismiss them, is very unconscionable.”

“We want to make sure our citizenry knows that this is the people’s house and that the people have a voice,” Joseph said. “As long as I remain the chair of this committee, they will have a voice. They needed to be heard and not dismissed today, and that’s why I objected, because I understand, clearly, our constitutional rights …” she said, while holding a copy of the U.S. Constitution, noting the importance of free speech.

Joseph emphasized transparency and public participation in the legislative process, warning against dismissing the voices of those most affected by proposed legislation.

“We cannot be a body that does not include persons who are affected by certain legislation. That’s hypocritical,” Joseph said. “We are their servants, and they have every right to be heard. They shouldn’t be dismissed.”

The committee’s decision means both bills will undergo further review and possible changes before returning for consideration. Lawmakers indicated that additional hearings will be scheduled, giving the public and stakeholders more opportunities to weigh in as the legislative process continues.