Transcript Highlights:

• Where is the liability for the painful death or, you know, something that would be considered negligent
• Chair, Representative Dow, I couldn't really speak to the liability effort, all the things that something
• us to cover in their basic operating is the health care for their employees and their increased liability
• There are many times when I believe there need to be changes, particularly with our judicial district's
• I'd really like to put an advisory board together and have a real investment program to have asset-liability

Bills: HB1

Keywords: feed bill, legislative appropriations, legislative branch, New Mexico Legislature, general fund, legislative council service, legislative finance committee, legislative education study committee, house chief clerk, senate chief clerk, per diem, mileage, session expenses, interim committees, district staff, capitol complex, capital outlay data system, legislative processing system, redistricting, census redistricting

Transcript Highlights:

• The provision is necessary because a 2019 court decision created a strict liability litigation cloud
• assert a much needed and very narrow natural geology defense provided by this bill against strict liability
• assert a much needed and very narrow natural geology defense provided by this bill against strict liability
• It ensures due process, protects the integrity of judicial appointments, and balances parental rights
• unions, and trusts are not required to accept deposits of gold and silver coin and do not incur liability

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, opened with prayer and the Pledge, and heard several member introductions and recognitions. The Rules Chair moved CS/CS/SB 622 to the end of the special order calendar, which was adopted without objection. SB 80 on state land management was temporarily postponed, as were later bills SB 716 and CS/CS/CS/SB 1348. The chamber then took up a series of bills, often substituting House companions and adopting amendments before final passage. Measures approved included a comprehensive waste reduction and recycling plan (HB 295, 38-0), mitigation banking and land development changes with a phosphate mining lands amendment (CS/CS/SB 492, 35-3), aggravated animal cruelty with a searchable FDLE database and sentencing multiplier (HB 255, 37-0), the Spectrum Alert for missing children with autism and related training/funding (HB 711, 37-0), newborn screening for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (CS/CS/HB 1089, 36-0), and revisions to the My Safe Florida Condominium Pilot Program to expand eligible mitigation projects and adjust approval thresholds (CS/CS/HB 393, 37-0). The Senate also passed workforce education legislation allowing charter schools access to grant funding and expanding money-back guarantees (HB 1145, 37-0), a statewide study on automation and workforce impact (HB 827, 35-0), parole guideline revisions (HB 181, 37-0), court-appointed psychologist procedures in family law cases (HB 901, 37-0), sexual cyber harassment protections covering digitally forged intimate images (HB 1451, 37-0), a home health aide program for medically fragile children with training and reimbursement provisions (CS/CS/SB 1156, 37-0), substance abuse and mental health care changes including 988 oversight and involuntary examination procedures (HB 1091, 37-0), a feasibility study for a statewide pond data database (HB 1359, 37-0), and Department of Law Enforcement housekeeping changes and retired police dog reimbursements (HB 1053, 37-0). The most extensive debate centered on the charter schools bill (HB 443), which expanded charter autonomy, reporting parity, enrollment flexibility, and governance rules; after a delete-all amendment and a friendly amendment, it was placed on the third-reading calendar rather than immediately voted on. Several bills were briefly discussed with concerns about transparency, accountability, funding, and constitutional issues, but all bills brought to a vote during this segment passed.

Transcript Highlights:

• I have never in my almost 30 years seen any sort of judicial sanction against a student that had a can
• The bill aligns criminal liability with actual public safety concerns rather than arbitrary distinctions
• <03:20:32.239> with The bill aligns criminal liability with The bill aligns criminal liability
• 03:22:01.120> and<03:22:01.439> confines<03:22:01.920> the<03:22:02.080> liability
• <03:22:03.120> to clarity and confines the liability to clarity and confines the liability

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's very broad, which would leave it open to judicial involvement, lawsuit involvement.
• that technology is moving forward, and one day they will be able to tap it, but they are taking a liability
• That is a liability that the state of Louisiana, if we continue to sequester and invite all the businesses
• , and technology is moving forward, and one day we will be able to tap that, but we are taking a liability

Summary: The committee took up public comment on a package of similar local-option bills related to carbon capture and sequestration, including House Bills 5, 6, 497, 498, 501, and 504. The bills would let parishes, or in some cases specific parishes such as Rapides and Livingston, decide by local vote whether Class VI wells, CO2 sequestration, and related pipeline infrastructure could be permitted. The chair grouped the bills together for testimony, adopted a three-minute public comment rule, and noted that the bills were not yet under consideration for a vote during the public-comment portion. Supporters, including Speaker Pro Tem Mike Johnson, parish officials, local activists, and residents, argued that communities affected by carbon capture projects should have a direct voice through local option elections. They said the bills were about self-determination, local control, and allowing residents to decide whether the risks are worth the benefits. Several speakers said their parishes had passed resolutions opposing carbon capture or asking for local choice, while others emphasized concerns about eminent domain, aquifer protection, lack of public understanding, and the need for more information about project impacts and financial benefits. Some supporters also said a local vote would force industry to engage more directly with communities and could improve transparency. Opponents, including representatives of the Department of Conservation and Energy, the Louisiana Chemistry Association, the Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association, and the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry, warned that the bills would create uncertainty, undermine Louisiana’s primacy over Class VI permitting, and invite litigation under federal preemption and the Supremacy Clause. They said the state already has a strict permitting process with public input and technical review, and that allowing parish-by-parish approval could delay or block billions of dollars in investment, jobs, and export-related projects. The department testified that if the state adopted a local-option referendum system, EPA could determine Louisiana was not implementing the program consistently and could move to remove primacy. No committee vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The chair now Judicial Retention.
• integrity,<00:21:02.040> judicial factors as integrity, judicial factors as integrity, judicial
• concerning all judicial officers. concerning all judicial officers.
• Judicial Retention. Judicial Retention.
• time on judicial retention. time on judicial retention.

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• AOT is operating in Bernalillo, the third judicial, and the first judicial has just launched its first
• In terms of the conversation that came up earlier about the judicial salary increases, every judicial
• Thank you for all the work you do for this judicial district. for this judicial district.
• Chair, Representative Brown, a judicial specialist and a judicial specialist senior lead worker—those
• then the 10th Judicial District.

Transcript Highlights:

• and our lease costs at the judicial and our lease costs at the judicial center<00:02:17.200>
• There are five judicial officers.
• So, um I'm judicial branch so much.
• in the judicial branch. So thank you. in the judicial branch. So thank you.
• And so if we are to be advocates for the judicial branch, the judicial branch has to come and tell us

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee took up House File 3874 and laid it over for possible inclusion in a finance bill. The Minnesota Judicial Branch, represented by State Court Administrator Jeff Shorba and Chief Judge Michael Fritz, presented a supplemental funding request focused on two main areas: judicial safety and security, and the employer share of Minnesota Paid Leave costs. Shorba said the branch was grateful for prior budget support but noted it did not receive salary increases for staff or judges and did not get funding for juror per diem. He explained that the branch is seeking funding for personal data protection, home security, two additional judicial security positions, security for the chief justice at public events, and a revived courthouse security grant program. Much of the testimony centered on rising threats against judges and court staff. Shorba and Fritz described increases in incidents, threats, and disturbances, and Fritz gave several examples of threatening behavior involving judges’ homes, personal information, and online doxxing. They argued that the branch needs better threat assessment, coordination with local law enforcement, and security measures at homes, courthouses, and online. Members expressed support for the concerns and asked questions about how threats are currently handled and whether state patrol officers assigned to security duties would need additional training. The second major topic was the judicial branch’s request for funding to cover its employer contribution to Minnesota Paid Leave, which took effect in January 2026. Shorba said the branch followed MMB’s calculations and expected the cost to be addressed through broader state government funding, but the branch did not receive an operational adjustment. He said the branch is now having to hold positions open to absorb the cost. Members questioned why the request was not included in the earlier budget process, and Shorba responded that the branch believed the issue would be handled centrally and later learned it had not been funded for the judiciary. No vote on the funding requests was taken in the discussion shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• compensation as well as judicial transparency, accountability, judicial compensation as well as judicial
• First off, you all have judicial conduct that you can't fight back.
• As an organization, 100% fully behind increase in judicial pay.
• On the bill, just so I can be consistent as a judicial officer.
• I can be consistent as a judicial officer.

Bills: HB40

Keywords: law enforcement, sheriffs, constables, contracts, county authority

Summary: The Committee on Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence met to hear House Bill 1761, a broad judicial package focused on increasing judicial compensation and adding accountability and efficiency measures. The chair explained that HB 1707 and HB 2100 were withdrawn from the agenda, and that HB 1761 would be taken up first because many judges and stakeholders were present. The committee substitute for HB 1761 proposed a 30% increase in base judicial pay to $182,000, changes to judicial retirement linkage, stronger judicial conduct provisions, and efficiency measures such as targeted reporting for judges not meeting benchmarks, appellate in-person meeting encouragement, and time limits on certain motions. The chair and several supporters said judicial pay had reached “emergency status,” citing Texas’s low national ranking and difficulty recruiting and retaining qualified judges. Witnesses in support included presiding and district judges, the State Bar’s judicial section, business and trial lawyer groups, and prosecutors. They emphasized that many judges work long hours off the bench, handle warrants at night and on weekends, manage heavy dockets, and face recruitment problems in both urban and rural counties. Supporters also said higher pay would help attract experienced lawyers, retain judges, and improve court efficiency. Several witnesses and members discussed judicial accountability, including public reporting of court performance and the role of the Texas Supreme Court and presiding judges in setting benchmarks. Some members raised concerns that raw statistics can be misleading because judges also do substantial off-the-bench work and often help cover other courts’ dockets. There was also testimony and discussion about the bill’s conduct and discipline provisions. A representative of the Texas Civil Rights Project opposed parts of the bill that would tie pay raises to changes affecting judicial independence, warning about subjective bail-related discipline standards and possible chilling effects. The executive director of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct cautioned against civil penalties for complainants, saying it could discourage good-faith complaints and create litigation risks. Other witnesses supported accountability reforms but urged caution about unintended consequences, especially for family and emergency cases and for judges handling warrants and other time-sensitive matters. After testimony, the committee withdrew the committee substitute and left HB 1761 pending, then recessed the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• I have filed House Bill 2699, which is a House bill regarding tampering with judicial officers and judicial
• My concern... ...judicial officers, prosecutors, all of that.
• And then turning to the other part where we get into judicial tampering.
• judge or a judicial employee under our current law.
• We support the protection of judicial officers. And so whatever that looks like.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We didn't have the judicial process set up to take on the millions of people, over 10 million people.
• We didn't have the judicial process set up to take on the millions of people, over 10 million people.
• of the judici judiciary committee, Mr. of the judici judiciary committee, Mr. Rasin. Rasin.
• It does not require officers to get judicial warrants.
• require officers to get judicial require officers to get judicial warrants.<06:33:23.680> This

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Tuesday, June 9, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Item 6, judicial salaries.
• Moving on to item 2, judicial salaries.
• provides judicial education for the judicial branch, have steadily recovered.
• Um, we appreciate the efforts to increase judicial compensation.
• I'll be presenting the State Commission on Judicial Conduct.

Transcript Highlights:

• I had a question about the judicial transparency information section.
• We have Jacqueline Habersham from executive Director for the State Commission of Judicial Conduct.
• We have Andy Kahn, uh, public member of the state judicial conduct commission, and Cynthia.
• Cindy Thomas, general counsel for the state commission on judicial conduct.
• And so judicial pay plays into the democratic process and the true.

Transcript Highlights:

• for many licensees is going to be civil liability.
• for many licensees is going to be civil liability.
• greater liability for many lences<04:56:33.360> is<04:56:33.520> going<04:56:33.600>
• > to<04:56:33.680> be<04:56:33.840> civil<04:56:34.080> liability.
• <04:56:34.958> a lences is going to be civil liability. a lences is going to be civil liability

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• hear budget proposals from the Judicial Branch and the Department of Justice.
• Francine Byrne, Director of Criminal Justice Services, Judicial Council.
• And it's important to note that Judicial Council did a study ...cases.
• The judicial department, the judge, is going to oversee it.
• I'm the Administrative Director of the Judicial Council.

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on Proposition 36 and its implementation, with judicial and budget officials describing it as a major shift from misdemeanor to felony processing for repeat drug possession and certain theft offenses. Witnesses explained that the law creates a treatment-mandated felony process that can lead to dismissal if a defendant completes treatment, but also requires evaluations, court monitoring, and potentially long, open-ended supervision. Judicial representatives said the new law is already generating large numbers of filings, creating workload, staffing, courtroom, and facility pressures, and that access to treatment beds, housing, and evaluation capacity is limiting participation. Several speakers emphasized that collaborative courts are effective but are not a perfect fit for Prop. 36 because those programs are typically probation-based and serve different risk/need populations. Court officials from San Bernardino and Orange counties said the impacts vary by county but are severe, with some counties seeing hundreds or more filings in a short period and others moving more slowly to build treatment infrastructure first. They argued that Prop. 36 is effectively an unfunded mandate unless the state provides more resources for judges, staff, facilities, treatment, housing, and supervision. The Legislative Analyst’s Office noted that Prop. 36 will reduce the Proposition 47 savings that fund mental health and substance use treatment grants, but said the near-term reduction is relatively modest and that the full effect will take time to appear because of the way those savings are calculated. Members of the committee repeatedly raised concerns that the state is underfunding the courts and counties needed to carry out the new law. The committee also reviewed the Governor’s proposed trial court operations budget, including a partial restoration of a prior $97 million cut and additional ongoing funding. Judicial branch officials said the restoration helped avoid furloughs, hiring freezes, and service reductions, and supported cybersecurity, technology, staffing, and records management. The LAO recommended that the Legislature seek more detail on how midyear restorations are handled and consider clarifying language for transferring unspent trial court trust fund monies to the General Fund. Finance said the flexibility in the ongoing funding was intentional and would be taken back for consideration. In a separate item, the committee heard testimony on a $6.3 million increase for Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal appointed counsel programs. Judicial officials and appellate project representatives said the system is facing a crisis because indigent appeals have risen sharply while the number of panel attorneys has fallen, leaving many cases waiting months for counsel. They argued the proposed increase would help but is still below what is needed to recruit and retain attorneys and prevent delays that affect criminal, juvenile, and child welfare cases. The committee also discussed the Tracy courthouse project in San Joaquin County, where local officials said reopening a courthouse closed since 2011 is necessary to serve a growing population and relieve overcrowding elsewhere. The LAO and Finance both noted the project is next in line under the facilities plan, though LAO suggested the Legislature could consider whether other facility priorities should come first.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we're honored that judges and justices from all 58 counties representing the Golden State's judicial
• And it's this judicial independence that separates the United States of America And it's this judicial
• Currently, we have about 67 judicial vacancies. I had to update the number from yesterday.
• At our April Judicial Council meeting, we will receive a report on our weighted case flow model.
• The Judicial Council will vote on this recommended rule later this year.

Summary: The California Legislature met in joint convention for the annual State of the Judiciary address, with judges and justices from across the state in attendance along with Governor Newsom and other statewide officials. The opening included prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, followed by the formal introduction of Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero and the California Supreme Court justices. Speakers emphasized the importance of judicial independence, the courts’ role in protecting rights and democracy, and the value of collaboration between the legislative and judicial branches. Chief Justice Guerrero focused on the state of the judicial branch, beginning with budget pressures from prior cuts and noting partial restoration in the governor’s proposed budget, while urging continued stable funding for courts, court-appointed counsel, and judgeships in high-need counties. She highlighted the expansion and benefits of remote proceedings, ongoing judicial vacancies, workload growth, and efforts to improve data collection and case-weighting. She also discussed implementation of the CARE Act, the court interpreter workforce pilot, CASA and kin-first child welfare efforts, courthouse security and facilities projects, and the judiciary’s work on generative AI guardrails. A major portion of the address addressed the recent problems with the California bar exam and broader State Bar oversight. Guerrero said the court would pursue remedies for examinees harmed by the failures and would strengthen admissions oversight, including the role of the Committee of Bar Examiners. She also reiterated support for pro bono legal services and discussed immigration-related courthouse access, citing state laws limiting cooperation with federal immigration enforcement in courthouses. The convention concluded after remarks thanking the judiciary and Legislature, and the joint session adjourned without any recorded votes or formal legislative action.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then judicial retirement is the judicial branch's portion of retirement for our judges.
• <00:08:00.160> judicial judicial retirement is the judicial judicial retirement is the judicial
• Center, Clark County Judicial Center, Greenup County Judicial Center, Knox County Judicial Center, and
• Center, Clark County Judicial Center, Greenup County Judicial Center, Knox County Judicial Center, and
• Center, Clark County Judicial Center, Greenup County Judicial Center, Knox County Judicial Center, and

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Interim Joint Budget Review Subcommittee on Justice and Judiciary met without a quorum and heard an update from the Administrative Office of the Courts on the judicial branch budget. AOC Director Zach Ramsey and budget director Carol Henderson outlined the branch’s current funding structure, noting that fiscal year 2026 general fund support is about 2.77% of the state general fund, below the National Center for State Courts’ typical 2% to 4% range. They emphasized Kentucky’s unusual responsibility for courthouse facilities, with the judicial branch directly involved in construction, maintenance, and operations across 229 facilities in all 120 counties. AOC said nearly 91% of its general fund is spent on personnel and other non-discretionary costs, and that the branch has long relied on agency revenue, restricted fund carryforwards, and vacancy credits to balance court operations. Members were told that Senate Bill 25 required a $34.5 million transfer into a reserve account, part of which was used to purchase the Chamberlain Avenue building in Frankfort. AOC reported that only $11.9 million remains in restricted funds, while it projects needing about $13.5 million to cover fiscal year 2026 obligations, not including roughly $9 million in flood-related remediation costs for Hardin and Franklin counties, much of which it expects to recover through insurance and FEMA. Looking ahead to the next biennium, AOC said it will seek full funding of court operations at $341 million annually, a $13.5 million increase to bring current services into the base appropriation rather than relying on reserves. It also previewed additional requests, including a 15% across-the-board pay parity plan for Kentucky Court of Justice personnel, replacement of declining master commissioner fee revenue tied to 141 deputy circuit court clerk positions, funding for technology subscription and case management system costs, JAV audiovisual system upgrades, AEDs and medical kits for courthouses, and other staffing and operational needs. Senator Funky Frommeyer asked whether the 15% salary proposal was included in the $13.5 million increase; AOC said it was not, and that it would be an additional request. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• judicial officer funded.
• We have our drug court judicial officers and we have our judicial officer, our public defender, our DA
• Theodorovic, Director of Budget Services, Judicial Council, long-term Judicial Service Council member
• I'm the Administrative Director of the Judicial Council.
• We are grateful to the Judicial Council for its support.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And you know, I recognize that yes, he could get caught up on this, but I think that um with the judicial
• <02:25:16.399> uh<02:25:16.640> with<02:25:16.800> the<02:25:17.120> judicial
• that um the the uh with the judicial that um the the uh with the judicial discretion<02:25:18.080
• >> There's civil liability for people who lend their car to someone they know has a bad driving record
• then they call down and say, pull over the white Ford, and that's how that goes. >> There is civil liability

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Outlined in the preamble of the judicial conduct, which judges are typically bound by the judicial conduct
• Judicial Conduct.
• The code of judicial conduct. Code of judicial conduct? Right, and that is already in statute.
• Judicial conduct there. Correct. I would just replace ethical standards with judicial conduct.
• Judicial conduct.

Bills: HB1455

Keywords: tribal consultation, Indian Affairs Commission, tribal governments, tribal sovereignty, state-tribal relations, Native American, tribal nations, consultation requirement, legislative process, jurisdiction, sovereignty, North Dakota tribes, government-to-government consultation, tribal chairpersons, 908, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee first heard House Bill 1455, which would require the North Dakota Indian Affairs Commission to review introduced legislation for tribal implications and conduct consultation with affected tribes. Rep. Collette Brown said the bill was intended to formalize and strengthen tribal consultation, and Standing Rock Sioux Tribe representative Ross Bell testified in support. Brad Hawk, executive director of the Indian Affairs Commission, testified neutrally, saying the office already does much of this work but that the bill would add structure; several senators raised concerns about duplication, possible future staffing costs, and whether the bill was necessary. The committee amended the bill to replace “each measure” with “all legislation,” then passed a do-not-pass recommendation on HB 1455 by recorded vote, with Sen. Luick designated as carrier. The committee then took up House Bill 1032, dealing with municipal courts, appeals, and judge qualifications. Legislative Council and court staff walked through proposed amendments, including making municipal courts courts of record on a delayed effective date, clarifying appeal procedures, and adding standards for municipal judges. Members discussed whether to use the term “ethical standards” or “judicial conduct”; after questions about definitions and enforcement, the committee settled on replacing the language with “judicial conduct” in the amended bill. The committee adopted the amendments and then passed HB 1032 as amended on a do-pass vote, with Sen. Cory to carry. Later, the committee heard House Bill 1263, which would make it easier for people with criminal records to seek sealing after a denial by allowing an appeal and reducing the waiting period for a new petition from three years to one year. Rep. Nels Christensen, Christopher Davis, Travis Fink, and Brad Peterson all supported the bill’s goal of giving people a better path to rehabilitation and employment. The main point of disagreement was whether to keep the statutory presumption that the benefit to the petitioner must outweigh the presumption of openness of criminal records; several witnesses urged removing that language, while others said it was part of the compromise that created the current law. The committee closed the hearing without taking final action and said it would review the House discussion before deciding later.

Transcript Highlights:

• Does the bill include any provisions to prevent increased long-term liabilities to the retirement system
• Does the bill include any provisions to prevent increased long-term liabilities to the retirement system

Bills: SB1778, SB1570, SB134, SB1966, SB1636, SB1725, SB1726, SB259, SB504, SB592, SB2030, SB1572, SB843, SB1242, SB1255, SB1262, SB1264, SB1286, SB1581, SB1290, SB1316, SB1319, SB1369, SB1379, SB1381, SB1400, SB1427, SB1436, SB1461, SB1496, SB1509, SB1534, SB1553, SB904, SB1592, SB1645, SB1684, SB1767, SB1772, SB1813, SB1894, SB1928, SB1946, SB1980, SB2040, SB2060, SB2061

Keywords: reading instruction, literacy, educational equity, intervention services, third grade retention, Strong Readers Act, child welfare, child safety, administrative transition, Department of Child Safety and Well-being, Oklahoma Commission on Children and Youth, juvenile justice, foster care, retirement, public employees, reemployment, benefit adjustment, Oklahoma Public Employees Retirement System, memorial highways, bridge designations