Video & Transcript Research : 'protected speech'
Page 11 of 500
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Criminal Justice and Public Safety (02/21/2025)
Criminal Justice and Public Safety
Transcript Highlights:
- [No audible speech; stray vocalization.] [No audible speech; stray vocalization.]
- [No audible speech; stray vocalization.] [No audible speech; stray vocalization.]
- [No audible speech; stray vocalization.] [No audible speech; stray vocalization.]
- [No audible speech; stray vocalization.] [No audible speech; stray vocalization.]
- [No audible speech; stray vocalization.] [No audible speech; stray vocalization.]
MN
Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session
House Transportation Finance and Policy Committee 2/26/25
Transportation Finance and Policy
Transcript Highlights:
- It will have a chilling effect on the exercise of constitutionally protected speech.
- I think there are ample, and it's been proven, there's place for First Amendment and protected speech
- I think there are ample, and it's been proven, there's place for First Amendment and protected speech
- I think there are ample, and it's been proven, there's place for First Amendment and protected speech
- I think there are ample, and it's been proven, there's place for First Amendment and protected speech
KY
Kentucky 2026 Regular Session
Information Technology Oversight Committee (1-12-26)
Transcript Highlights:
- Each of these protected speech.
- <00:47:52.640>
and <00:47:52.800>our protection of of our speech and our protection of - >
the <00:48:28.480>same also protected speech and the same also protected speech and the - blind that could go into protected blind that could go into protected speech<00:48:44.880>
territory - where you know speech is also protected. where you know speech is also protected.
Keywords:
Meeting Start 00:00:00
KentuckyWired Communications Network Authority 00:01:20
Artificial Intelligence and Free Expression 00:38:40, 958, all
Summary:
The committee questioned KCNA officials about the Kentucky Wired network refresh, focusing on whether the equipment truly needed replacement now and what the vendor end-of-support dates were for the network’s layer 1, 2, and 3 equipment. Senators and representatives pressed for invoices, purchase orders, and vendor documentation, and KCNA staff explained that end-of-support dates vary by specific model and component, not just by broad product family. KCNA agreed to provide a detailed list of components, part numbers, and support dates, and acknowledged that some requested documentation had not yet been produced.
A major point of discussion was the timing of the system refresh. KCNA said the 10-year refresh schedule comes from the project agreement, specifically Schedule 19, Section 2.1B, which requires the first system refresh to be completed by September 3, 2026. Committee members argued the network equipment appears to remain in service life for at least the next two years and questioned why an upgrade would be needed immediately. KCNA responded that failing to complete the refresh could excuse the service provider from contractual obligations and could constitute a material breach or default under the project and bond documents.
Members also asked about network capacity and the impact on schools and state users. KCNA said it would need to check with Quark for an exact utilization figure, while the chair cited prior testimony that schools account for about 80% of traffic and KCNA about 20%. The committee raised concerns about schools not connected to the network and the effect of KCNA’s actions on continuity of service, while KCNA disputed that K-12 service had been put at risk. KCNA also explained the contract and payment structure: the Commonwealth’s project agreement runs through Kentucky Wired Infrastructure Corporation/Quark, with KEDA-issued bonds and funds flowing through Quark in a waterfall structure.
The meeting ended with KCNA agreeing to request underlying vendor invoices from Quark, provide the requested contract documents, and supply information on the status of the wholesaler replacement procurement and related litigation. No formal vote was taken.
TX
Texas 89th 2nd C.S.
Trade, Workforce & Economic Development May 21st, 2025
Trade, Workforce & Economic Development
Transcript Highlights:
- The first is the seven protected classes enumerated under the federal protections against discrimination
- I strongly urge you to support the bill to protect Texans' free speech within professional associations
- speech.
- as freedom of speech.
- You know that freedom of speech doesn't protect you there.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
- Customs and Border Protection website. It gives examples of that.
- state of Texas has no authority to limit their free speech once they are here.
- And free speech is especially important in the context of higher education.
- It explicitly targets international students and employees with punishment for speech that is fully protected
- It is not about speech or limiting or affecting speech or impinging speech, but it is about public money
Summary:
The Senate Education K-16 Committee heard several bills before recessing to the floor, with most measures left pending subject to the call of the chair. SB 2986 would allow public schools and universities to permit after-hours facility use by religious groups on the same terms as other nonprofits, and SB 1032 would open the Governor’s University Research Initiative to private and independent universities; both had committee substitutes adopted and were left pending after brief testimony. Supporters of SB 1032 from Rice and Baylor said the change would help Texas recruit top researchers and strengthen the state’s research economy. The committee also heard SB 2058, which would require the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board to publish annual data on nursing clinical training sites to improve placement coordination, and SB 2683, which would bar public colleges from giving benefits or recognition to student organizations that receive support from foreign entities of concern; both were left pending after testimony.
A large portion of the meeting focused on SB 2233, which would require public institutions of higher education to adopt policies prohibiting students or employees on nonimmigrant visas from publicly supporting terrorist activity or organizations, with enforcement through investigations, reporting to Homeland Security, and possible Attorney General action and fines. The author said the bill was intended to reinforce existing federal definitions and campus safety, while senators questioned the bill’s scope, the definition of terrorist activity, and the clause tied to U.S. policy or practice. Public witnesses, including civil rights advocates, law students, and others, argued the bill was vague, overbroad, unconstitutional, and likely to chill protected speech and increase surveillance of international students and Black and brown communities; several Jewish witnesses also said the bill misused Jewish safety concerns and could be used for viewpoint discrimination. SB 2233 was left pending after public testimony.
The committee then took up SB 735, which builds on prior Holocaust education legislation by funding optional age-appropriate and bilingual curriculum, museum field trips, teacher preparation partnerships, annual reporting, and regional collaboration with Holocaust museums and education service centers. The author and invited witnesses said the bill responds to survey findings showing uneven Holocaust instruction and a need for better teacher training and accountability. A fifth-grade teacher and the director of the Holocaust Memorial Museum of San Antonio testified in support, emphasizing the need for accurate, age-appropriate instruction and professional development. The committee recessed before finishing the agenda, and SB 735 was set to resume after the floor session.
OK
Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session
Senate Legislative Session Feb 4th, 2026 at 01:30 pm
Oklahoma Senate Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- protection.
- Our nation was built upon these protections and free speech.
- Free speech, and I think it, we need to all listen to JD Vance's speech.
- This is a protection of religion, a protection of worship bill. We saw what happened in Minnesota.
- Any man is going to protect his church.
Bills:
SB1519, SB1775, SB1900, SB1948, SB2080, SB1226, SB1456, SB1462, SB1463, SB1980, SB1479, SB1608, SB1923
Keywords:
municipal zoning, home-based businesses, no-impact businesses, local government, regulation, short-term rentals, municipal ordinance, municipal court, court of record, court not of record, city penalties, fine limits, penalty cap, ordinance enforcement, state statute, traffic offenses, speeding, parking, DUI, DWI
MO
Transcript Highlights:
- Hateful speech is constitutionally protected, and the bill explicitly says that.
- No other minority protections deal with what is acceptable speech about a foreign country, and it does
- of speech.
- I would like to make it clear: speech criticizing Israel is protected under this bill, and I'm going
- When something leaves the protection of free speech and becomes harassment or intimidation, this can
US
US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session
US House Floor Proceedings (Friday, January 3, 2025)
US Federal House Floor Meeting
Transcript Highlights:
- [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.]
- [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.]
- [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.]
- [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.]
- [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.]
NH
New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session
House Criminal Justice and Public Safety (01/24/2025)
Criminal Justice and Public Safety
Transcript Highlights:
- [Unintelligible / no transcribable speech.] [Unintelligible / no transcribable speech.]
- [Unintelligible / no transcribable speech.] [Unintelligible / no transcribable speech.]
- [Unintelligible / no transcribable speech.] [Unintelligible / no transcribable speech.]
- [Unintelligible / no transcribable speech.] [Unintelligible / no transcribable speech.]
- [Unintelligible / no transcribable speech.] [Unintelligible / no transcribable speech.]
KY
Kentucky 2025 Regular Session
House Standing Committee on Postsecondary Education (3-11-25)
Transcript Highlights:
- the line of protected speech.
- they there was protected free speech and they there was protected free speech and they were<00:27
- That is not intended to be protected<00:42:15.920>
speech. - And that to me is the protected speech.
- It's sad, but it's protected speech.
Summary:
The committee first took up Senate Bill 77, which would allow comprehensive universities to pursue doctoral programs under a new approval process and, in the original bill, would also change who may serve on the EPSB board for small colleges and universities. The sponsor and Council on Postsecondary Education representative explained that the committee substitute removed the current statutory prohibition on comprehensive universities offering certain doctoral degrees, but added eligibility guardrails: a 77% first-to-second-year retention rate, a 56% six-year graduation rate, and three months of unrestricted cash reserves. They said the thresholds were based on national data placing institutions in roughly the top quartile, and that CPE would still review proposals for mission fit, workforce need, fiscal impact, and, where applicable, programmatic accreditation and legislative appropriations. EKU President David McFaden supported creating a pathway for comprehensive universities, said Kentucky is unusual in having an explicit statutory prohibition, and urged the committee to keep the standards attainable and durable. The committee approved the bill and adopted a title amendment, with the motion passing unanimously.
The committee then heard Senate Joint Resolution 55, which addresses antisemitism on postsecondary campuses. Senator Tichenor said the resolution responds to a rise in antisemitic incidents after October 7, 2023, and would require campuses to notify students each semester of Title VI rights, complaint procedures, existing harassment policies, and available Jewish student resources. It would also direct campuses to disband student organizations found to provide material support to known terrorist organizations, report such matters to law enforcement, and collect and report antisemitism data to CPE for posting on its website. A guest speaker from the Kentucky Jewish Council described a sharp increase in reported incidents, including harassment, threats, vandalism, and hostile campus activity, and argued that schools have often done too little to respond. He said the resolution was amended to protect free speech while ensuring Jewish students receive the same protections as other protected groups. The transcript ends while testimony on the resolution was still underway, before any committee vote on SJR 55.
NJ
New Jersey 2026-2027 Regular Session
Assembly Appropriations Jun 8th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- And most importantly, free speech is lost. Finally, A-2218... Importantly, free speech is lost.
- Protect Your Children. I'm also a Secular Franciscan, and... ...Protect Your Children.
- If passed as is, this new law will create criminal penalties for constitutionally protected speech simply
- But, I mean, you're, look, fight speech with speech.
- A2218 protects the people.
MO
Missouri 2026 Regular Session
Judiciary Apr 28th, 2026
Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence
Transcript Highlights:
- It establishes a Uniform Public Expression Protection Act to protect Missourians from meritless lawsuits
- issue, and how this protects them?
- It could be all kinds of speech. It could be political speech. It could be... ...would get sued.
- It could be all kinds of speech. It could be political speech.
- It could be speech on a number of topics.
Summary:
The committee held a public hearing on Senate Bill 1067, a Uniform Public Expression Protection Act intended to deter meritless lawsuits that chill free speech, often referred to as SLAPP suits. Senator Mike Henderson explained that the bill is based on a model from the Uniform Law Commission and would apply broadly to speech on matters of public concern, including political speech and social media, while preserving defamation and other legitimate claims. He said the bill gives defendants an immediate right to appeal anti-SLAPP rulings and requires plaintiffs to show early that their case has merit. Committee members asked about when the bill would apply, whether it would affect government-related speech, and whether expedited procedures would burden the courts; Henderson responded that it should reduce strain by allowing quicker dismissal of weak cases.
Witnesses testified in support of the bill. Doug Cruz of the Missouri Press Association said journalists and the public are frequent targets of expensive, meritless lawsuits meant to suppress reporting and speech. James Harris of the Institute for Free Speech said the bill is the companion to House Bill 2666 and noted similar versions have passed committee and the House in prior sessions with strong bipartisan support; he described the bill as allowing an earlier petition to the judge rather than waiting until the end of discovery. Michael Henderson, for the Missouri Broadcasters Association, and Susan Klein, for Missouri Right to Life, also spoke in favor. No one testified in opposition, and the chair closed the hearing and adjourned the Judiciary Committee.
FL
Florida 2026 4th Special Session
January 21, 2026 - 01:00 PM
Transcript Highlights:
- Representative: The First Amendment does not exist to protect comfortable speech.
- It exists to protect speech we disagree with. It exists to protect debate.
- Representative: If his speech can be answered with violence, whose speech is truly safe?
- If you want to honor free speech I'm thinking why not make it a Free Speech Day.
- In Florida, speech is answered with speech.
FL
Florida 2026 5th Special Session
Judiciary Jan 20th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- protections.
- protections.
- protection in place against the agents.
- So you do run into some speech issues, and when it comes into religious speech, which I believe this
- given special protection, much like political speech.
Summary:
The committee heard and advanced several bills. SB 624, by Senator Yarborough, would allow batterers intervention programs to offer optional supplemental faith-based activities, with no participant required to take part; supporters said it would expand provider options amid a shortage of certified programs, while opponents raised concerns about government speech and mixing religion with court-ordered programming. After debate, the bill was reported favorably 7-2. The committee also considered CS/SB 834, which repeals a 2022 restriction preventing licensed insurance agents from marketing or selling health care sharing ministries; supporters framed it as restoring choice and free speech, while opponents warned about consumer confusion, commissions, and lack of insurance protections. It was reported favorably 8-2.
The committee next approved CS/SB 502, via a strike-all amendment, to give Florida concurrent jurisdiction over certain juvenile offenses on military installations so juveniles can be handled in state juvenile court rather than federal court; the amendment and bill both passed unanimously. CS/SB 52 also passed unanimously after testimony from church leaders and security personnel supporting an exemption from Class D/G licensing for unpaid armed security volunteers at places of worship. Supporters said the bill would clarify legal gray areas and help churches afford security, while members noted the broader concern that houses of worship need armed protection at all.
Finally, the committee reported favorably SB 840, which revises last year’s emergency/local planning law by narrowing its application after storms from 100 miles to 50 miles of the storm track and exempting certain water, flood, and state/federal planning matters; local government representatives supported the clarification, and the bill passed 9-0. CS/SB 758, as amended, updated the membership of the Justice Administration Commission to better reflect the entities it oversees, and it also passed 9-0. The meeting ended with a recorded affirmative vote from Senator DeSigley on SB 624.
MO
Transcript Highlights:
- This is a Uniform Public Expression Protection Act.
- It establishes a Uniform Public Expression Protection Act to protect Missourians from meritless lawsuits
- issue, and how this protects them?
- It could be all kinds of speech. It could be political speech.
- It could be speech on a number of topics.
Summary:
The committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 1067, the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act, an anti-SLAPP measure intended to protect Missourians from meritless lawsuits that chill First Amendment activity. Senator Mike Henderson, the bill sponsor, said it would cover speech on matters of public concern, including social media and political speech, and would let defendants seek an early ruling so they are not forced through lengthy, expensive litigation. In response to questions, he said the bill would not eliminate defamation or slander claims and would likely reduce strain on the courts by allowing quicker dismissal of weak cases.
Supporters testified that the bill would protect journalists, broadcasters, and the public from frivolous suits aimed at silencing speech. The Missouri Press Association, the Institute for Free Speech, the Missouri Broadcasters Association, and Missouri Right to Life all spoke in favor. The Institute for Free Speech witness noted the bill is a companion to House Bill 2666 and said similar language has repeatedly received strong bipartisan support in Missouri and has been adopted in 36 states. Committee members asked about examples, the scope of protected speech, and whether expedited procedures would burden courts or disadvantage plaintiffs.
No witnesses spoke in opposition. After the public testimony, the chair closed the hearing on SB 1067 and adjourned the Judiciary Committee.
KY
Kentucky 2025 Regular Session
House Standing Committee on Small Business and Information Technology (3-12-25)
Transcript Highlights:
- He said SB 4 covers vast amounts of constitutionally protected speech, including political opinions expressed
- <00:12:44.160>
not <00:12:44.440>protected <00:12:44.920>by categories of speech - not protected by categories of speech not protected by the<00:12:45.240>
First <00:12:45.480>< - political speech and section four and political speech and section four and section<00:17:27.480>
- <00:17:31.679>
okay it does counter political speech okay it does counter political speech
Keywords:
Meeting Start 00:00
Roll Call 00:36
SB 4 Discussion 01:16
SB 4 Vote 28:30
SB 130 Discussion 31:18
SB 130 Discussion 36:02, 958, all
Summary:
The committee first took up Senate Bill 4, as amended by a committee substitute, which would create a state artificial intelligence governance framework for Kentucky government agencies and address AI-generated misinformation in campaigns and elections. The bill’s sponsors said it is intended to regulate only state government use of AI, not the private sector, and would require oversight by the Office of Technology, agency reporting, and annual reporting to the General Assembly. They also said the elections provisions were narrowed to focus on AI-generated audio and video, remove image disclosures, eliminate prior restraint and monetary damages, and rely on disclosure requirements modeled on laws they said had survived constitutional review in Texas.
Testimony on SB 4 was mixed. Supporters emphasized transparency, human accountability, and the need to prepare state government for rapidly changing AI tools, citing possible uses such as fraud detection, inmate classification, and transportation planning. An opponent from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression argued the bill would burden core political speech, create First Amendment problems, and invite litigation and abuse, especially in the election context. Members asked about litigation, constitutional concerns, costs, and whether the bill should be expanded later to cover ordinary citizens harmed by AI-generated content. Several members expressed support but noted reservations about the election sections or the need for future amendments.
After discussion, the committee voted on SB 4 and reported it favorably. The roll call showed the measure passing with favorable expression, with some members explaining votes as supportive but cautious, and one member initially passing before later recording a yes vote. The chair then moved to Senate Bill 130, and Senator Scott Maiden and Kentucky Retail Federation representative Shannon Stiglets began presenting it as a response to gift card scams and theft of redemption information, describing recent large-scale supermarket fraud cases in Kentucky and saying the problem is tied to broader organized retail crime.
NH
Transcript Highlights:
- [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.]
- [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.]
- [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.]
- [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.]
- [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.]
KY
Kentucky 2026 Regular Session
House Standing Committee on Small Business and Information Technology (2-18-26)
Small Business & Information Technology
Transcript Highlights:
- So, here's the bottom speech concerns.
- 16.720>
rights <00:09:17.040>of protects the first amendment rights of protects the first - puts common sense protections into law. puts common sense protections into law.
- Much better blocked protects nobody.
- under free speech.
Keywords:
Meeting start: 00:00
Roll call: 00:05
HB 227 discussion: 01:10
HB 227 voting: 49:38, 958, all
Summary:
The committee met with a quorum to consider House Bill 227, a time-sensitive measure focused on social media use by minors. The bill sponsor, Rep. Matt Lockett, and supporters including counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, the Attorney General’s office, and the Family Foundation argued that social media is addictive and harmful to children, contributes to mental health problems and exploitation, and that the bill would give parents more control while regulating addictive features rather than banning speech. Supporters said the bill is narrowly tailored, content-neutral, and designed to withstand constitutional scrutiny; the Attorney General’s office said it would defend the bill if challenged and described ongoing multi-state litigation against major platforms. One committee member also described seeing inappropriate AI-generated content on a 16-year-old’s phone as an example of the problem the bill seeks to address.
Opposition testimony came from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, NetChoice, and the Computer and Communications Industry Association. They argued the bill raises First Amendment concerns because it conditions minors’ access on parental consent, regulates how private platforms communicate with users, and could function as a de facto speech ban. They also warned that the age-estimation requirement could force platforms to collect more sensitive data, creating privacy and security risks, and that the ban on “addictive features” was overly broad and could sweep in personalized feeds, notifications, autoplay, and other common tools. Opponents said the bill could especially harm vulnerable youth who rely on online access for community or safety information and urged the committee to craft a constitutional alternative.
During questions, members asked how the state could enforce the law against national companies and were told enforcement would come through the Attorney General within Kentucky and potentially through multi-state litigation. Members also discussed the bill’s practical effects, including advertising revenue from youth users and the need for guardrails to protect children. The discussion continued with questions about the bill’s scope, parental consent, age estimation, and liability provisions, but no final vote or other committee action was shown in the excerpt.
AZ
Transcript Highlights:
- Members, I have some friends here with us who protect us and protect our families out there on the highways
- Members consist of audiologists, speech-language pathology assistants, otherwise known as SLPAs, speech
- audiologists, speech-language pathologists, speech-language pathology assistants, and speech and hearing
- If you want to protect students, then students in private schools deserve protection, too. Mr.
- The First Amendment protects parody, it protects satire and artistic expression, and this bill chills
Summary:
The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, attendance, approval of the journal, and several guest introductions, including the doctor of the day, Arizona State Troopers Day participants, the Arizona Speech-Language-Hearing Association, and a Delta Sigma Theta delegation. A Senate proclamation was read recognizing the Arizona Speech-Language-Hearing Association for its work serving people with communication disorders. The chamber then moved into Committee of the Whole and later third-reading votes on a large number of House bills, with several members offering floor explanations on controversial measures.
Among the bills considered in Committee of the Whole were HB 2133 on sexual material and synthetic depictions, HB 2167 relating to the Attorney General, HB 2600 on school clubs and parental consent, HB 255 on brackish groundwater recovery, HB 2787 on Mexican wolf reintroduction cooperation, HB 2795 on small modular reactor zoning, HB 2985 on state land water allocations, and HB 2003 on driver instruction permits. HB 2133 was amended, including a floor amendment adding exemptions for parody, comedy, artistic expression, and criticism, and the committee recommended it do pass as amended. HB 2787 and HB 2985 advanced after divided votes, while HB 2795 failed in the later floor vote. HB 2003 was amended to add a delayed effective date of December 1, 2026 and advanced out of committee.
On third reading, the Senate passed HB 2013, 2031, 2102, 2103, 2117, 2226, 2262, 2278, 2378, 2584, 2693, 2270, 2370, 2665, 2666, 2876, 487, 2003, 255, 2133, 2167, 2600, 2787, 2811, and 2985, with several votes split largely along party lines. HB 2795 was defeated. Debate focused heavily on water policy, public safety, school parental consent, speech and sexual-material regulation, local control over zoning, and the Attorney General’s authority. The Senate also agreed to a free conference committee for HB 2874 and appointed Senators Finchem, Bolick, and Ortiz, then adjourned until the next scheduled meeting.
FL
Transcript Highlights:
- protections.
- protections.
- protection in place against the agents.
- So you do run into some speech issues, and when it comes into religious speech, which I believe this
- protection, much like political speech.
Keywords:
places of worship, house of worship, church, mosque, synagogue, religious security, armed security, volunteer security, private security, security guard licensing, licensure exemption, Florida Statutes chapter 493, Class G license, Class C license, security services, faith-based institutions, public safety, military jurisdiction, delinquency, concurrent jurisdiction
Summary:
The committee considered several bills and reported each favorably. SB 624, by Senator Yarborough, would allow batterers intervention programs to offer optional supplemental faith-based activities, with no participant required to take part. Supporters said it would expand provider options and help address a shortage of certified programs; opponents raised concerns about mixing government-ordered programming with religion and about the state’s prior rule change. The bill passed 7-2.
The committee also approved CS/SB 834, which repeals a 2022 restriction barring licensed insurance agents from partnering with health care sharing ministries to market or sell their programs. The sponsor and supporters argued the bill restores free speech, consumer choice, and access to faith-based alternatives, while opponents warned about consumer confusion, higher commissions, and weak protections because these ministries are not insurance. After extended debate, the measure passed 8-2.
Other measures advanced unanimously or near-unanimously. CS/SB 502, as amended, would give Florida concurrent jurisdiction over certain juvenile offenses on military installations so juveniles can be handled in the state system; it passed 9-0. CS/SB 52 would exempt volunteer armed security for houses of worship from Class D or G licensing requirements, and supporters cited rising threats to churches and the need for organized volunteer security; it passed 9-0. SB 840, a cleanup bill to narrow and clarify last year’s emergency-related land-use restrictions after hurricanes, also passed 9-0, and CS/SB 758, which updates the membership of the Justice Administration Commission, passed 9-0 after an amendment restoring two public defenders to the commission.