Summary: The Judiciary Committee met to consider HB 6003, a bill to repeal Florida’s “free kill” law that limits certain survivors’ ability to recover non-economic damages in medical negligence wrongful death cases. The sponsor, Rep. Trabulsy, said the bill would restore access to the courts for a small class of families and noted the measure passed both chambers last year before being vetoed by the governor. She and supporters framed the bill as a fairness and constitutional issue, while opponents argued repeal would increase malpractice exposure, insurance costs, and pressure on physician access, especially in high-risk specialties and rural areas. Public testimony was sharply divided. Supporters included family members who described deaths they said were caused by medical negligence and who argued the current law denies accountability and equal treatment based on marital status or whether a decedent had minor children. Opponents included the Florida Hospital Association, Florida Medical Association, Florida Chamber, U.S. Chamber, Florida Insurance Council, and other health care and business groups, who warned that repeal could worsen already high malpractice premiums, contribute to physician shortages, and destabilize access to care. Several speakers on both sides discussed possible caps on non-economic damages as a compromise, though the bill itself was presented as a clean repealer with no amendments. During debate, several members spoke in support, emphasizing equal access to the courts and rejecting the idea that the law should treat some families differently from others. Opponents of the bill argued that the current system helps preserve market stability and that liability concerns, not the free kill law, are driving provider departures. After closing remarks from the sponsor, the committee voted 15 yeas and 1 nay to report HB 6003 favorably.

Summary: The State Affairs Committee opened with a tribute to the late Representative Joe Casello, with remarks from the chair and Ranking Member Eskamani honoring his service, especially his advocacy for first responders, veterans, and working people. The committee then turned to its only bill, HB 167, which would remove strict liability for certain previously mined phosphate lands if the landowner notifies the county and requests a Department of Health radiation survey. The sponsor said the bill is intended to create a voluntary process, add data about the land, and provide notice through the public record and title process. Members asked extensive questions about who pays for the surveys, how notice would reach future buyers, whether the bill affects renters or construction workers, and whether it would impact pending lawsuits. The sponsor said the landowner would pay for the survey needed to remove strict liability, plaintiffs would pay for surveys in litigation, the bill does not address OSHA or rental disclosures, and it would not apply retroactively to current cases because the complaint must include a survey. Supporters argued the bill simply replaces automatic liability with recorded notice and due diligence, while opponents said it could leave families and renters without adequate warning and should include stronger disclosure protections. Public testimony was in support from the Florida Chamber of Commerce, Associated Industries of Florida, and one individual. After debate, the committee voted 18-8 to report HB 167 favorably.

Summary: The Civil Justice and Claims Subcommittee met to consider one measure, PCS for HB 289, which would amend Florida’s wrongful death statute to allow parents of an unborn child to recover damages for the child’s wrongful death and to include parents in the definition of survivors. The sponsor said the bill is intended to give parents a remedy when a wrongful act, negligence, breach of contract, or breach of warranty causes the loss of an unborn child, while also preserving existing protections for lawful medical care and the mother. Members questioned the bill extensively about the meaning of “survivors,” whether it could reach surrogacy situations, friends or family who assist someone in obtaining abortion care, paternity issues, and whether abusive or unqualified fathers could bring claims. The sponsor repeatedly said the bill is limited to parents, does not authorize suits against the mother or lawful medical providers, and would still require the normal wrongful death procedures, including appointment of a personal representative. He cited Duncan v. Flynn as the case holding that current law does not allow recovery for the death of an unborn child. Representative Gottlieb offered an amendment modeled on criminal-law protections, aimed at expanding explicit immunity for a pregnant woman and for persons providing medical care or abortion-related conduct with consent. Supporters of the amendment said it would better align civil law with criminal protections; opponents argued it was overly broad and could shield unlicensed conduct. The amendment failed on a voice vote. Public testimony was divided, with supporters from pro-life and Catholic organizations backing the bill and some asking to remove the health care exemption, while opponents from ACLU, Equality Florida, Planned Parenthood affiliates, Florida Voice for the Unborn, Voices of Florida, and others warned the bill could chill reproductive health care, increase liability for doctors and hospitals, and invite lawsuits involving surrogates, family members, and abortion-related care. In debate, supporters said the bill simply recognizes the value of unborn children and gives parents a remedy for wrongful loss, while opponents argued it could create unintended consequences in family law, surrogacy, IVF, and medical practice, and could empower abusive partners or rapists. After closing remarks, the committee voted 13 yeas and 3 nays to report PCS for HB 289 favorably. The meeting then adjourned.

Summary: The committee first took up HB 133, which would lower the minimum age to purchase a long gun from 21 to 18. The sponsor and supporters argued the bill restores the rights of adults 18 and older, emphasizing constitutional rights, military service, voting, jury duty, and parental responsibility. Opponents, including gun violence prevention advocates and several members, cited Parkland and the recent FSU shooting, argued that people under 21 are still developing and more impulsive, and said the current law helps protect public safety. After extensive debate and public testimony on both sides, the committee voted 11-5 to report HB 133 favorably. The committee then considered PCS for HB 35, which adds driving without a valid license to the offenses that can lead to habitual traffic offender designation and is named Isaiah’s Law in memory of a child killed by an unlicensed driver. Supporters said it addresses repeat dangerous conduct and should help prevent similar tragedies. One member questioned whether it was a knee-jerk response, while others said it was a reasonable accountability measure. The PCS passed unanimously, 16-0, and was reported favorably. Finally, the committee heard HB 245, which updates Florida law to use more accurate terminology for child sexual abuse material rather than “child pornography,” and includes related technical corrections. The sponsor said the change better reflects the seriousness of the crime and asked whether the bill also covered AI-generated material; the sponsor said the statute already addresses such references. After a technical amendment was adopted, the bill passed unanimously, 16-0, and was reported favorably. The chair also reminded members to maintain respect toward public witnesses and each other before adjourning the meeting.