Transcript Highlights:

• I hear from people where they've got contracted case management, their case managers are not able to
• This is contracted case management.
• I hear from people where they've got contracted case management, their case managers are not able to
• This is contracted case management.
• feels like the count the contracted case feels like the count the contracted case management<00:

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We've talked a lot about the Slevin case here, interesting case.
• When I got in, we had 50 cases per homicide attorney, 50 cases, 50 homicide cases per homicide attorney
• We're juvenile gun cases. 11 juvenile homicide cases have been referred.
• There was a case, Mr.
• all cases across the board?

Transcript Highlights:

• Felony cases and case processing time are significantly longer than misdemeanors.
• average felony cases.
• And it will only get longer and longer as these cases prolong and more cases come in.
• What is their case about?
• cases, August for child welfare cases, and October for juvenile delinquency cases.

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:

• case.
• case was filed.
• He added that it would depend on the case-by-case basis.
• <04:16:58.319> can case to hear the civil forfeite case can case to hear the civil forfeite
• <04:17:01.439> um<04:17:01.760> cases cause a backlog in other cases. um cases cause

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• of any case that's still open. of any case that's still open.
• review case outcomes. review case outcomes.
• We're reviewing a case outcome. We're reviewing a case outcome.
• cases this woman has cases of the 71,000 cases this woman has presided<01:49:25.679> over<01:
• I've never had a case case case uh<02:05:25.679> against<02:05:26.080> her,<02:05:26.480

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• case, Randy Connor.
• There are other cases as well. The Tennessee v. Garner case, there's a... Tennessee v.
• that case on immunity grounds.
• , and one case that comes to my mind... ...cases, and one case that comes to my mind is a personal friend
• I do think it’s probably important in that case, and I didn't follow that case closely.

Bills: SB156, SB134, SB108, SB47, SB88, SB89, SB106, SB18, SB9, HB38, HB54

Keywords: habitual felony offender, resentencing, Alabama Department of Corrections, victim notification, criminal justice reform, life sentences, parole eligibility, pardon, parole, law enforcement, GPS monitoring, data sharing, mail theft, stolen mail, criminal penalties, personally identifying information, felony, misdemeanor, expungement, criminal records

Transcript Highlights:

• present his case to a trial judge. present his case to a trial judge.
• I know that the ongoing backlog of cases I know that the ongoing backlog of cases at<00:10:38.400
• decide cases as quickly as possible. decide cases as quickly as possible.
• 20:18.280> have<00:20:18.600> transcript some cases that don't have transcript some cases
• beforehand cuz a number of those cases beforehand cuz a number of those cases<00:23:55.360> can

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard testimony on Governor’s Message 725, the nomination of Daniel M. Gluck to serve as associate judge of the Intermediate Court of Appeals for a 10-year term. The chair announced a two-minute testimony limit, said the committee would not vote that day, and scheduled decision-making for the next day at 10:45 a.m. in Room 016. Testimony in support came from the Governor’s Office, judges and legal professionals, the Hawaii State Bar Association, and members of the public, including a child who described Gluck’s kindness and help in Girl Scouts. The committee reported 72 supporters, zero opposition, and one comment from the West Side Bar Association. Gluck thanked the committee and outlined his background in private practice, nonprofit work, and government service, including work in the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. He emphasized access to justice, pro bono representation, and his commitment to reducing the ICA backlog. In response to questions, he said he would focus on fuller staffing, shorter and more concise opinions, possible use of AI for limited administrative tasks, and process improvements to speed appeals. He also discussed appellate timelines, briefing schedules, and the value of oral argument for transparency and clarification. Members questioned him about impartiality, especially in cases involving tension between Hawaii and federal precedent. Gluck said judges must follow controlling law, including U.S. Supreme Court precedent on federal questions and Hawaii Supreme Court precedent on state-law issues, and that the judiciary should not make policy. He also described his current work as deputy corporation counsel, including HART, firearms licensing after Bruen, appeals, and pending state cases. No vote was taken, and the hearing was adjourned after questions concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• But every now and then you have a pretty complicated case, and judges in that case, especially given
• <00:31:06.640> especially case and judges in that case especially case and judges in that
• case especially given<00:31:07.440> their<00:31:07.679> case<00:31:08.000> loads
• You know, it will happen, and remember there are cases, and this happens most often in cases with an
• Thank you. for my clients to want to fight the case for my clients to want to fight the case if<00:40

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee took up a proposed amendment to HP 598, with Nick Norman walking members through changes intended to preserve the existing eviction framework rather than create a separate expedited process. He said the amendment folds the bill’s changes into current law, adds limits on post-judgment motions and continuances, shortens or eliminates certain discretionary stays in default situations, and speeds issuance of notices and writs of possession. The amendment also adds language to RSA 540A to allow action against tenants, family members, guests, or occupants engaging in conduct that damages property or threatens health and safety, and it changes the effective date to 90 days after passage. Norman also said the amendment was meant to reduce frivolous delays and court fiscal impacts. Members raised concerns about several provisions, especially the clause barring discretionary stays after tenant default, the use of the word “immediately” for issuing writs, and the reduction of discretionary stays from 90 days to 60 days. One member asked for clarification on whether any meritorious circumstances should still allow a stay, and another suggested defining a specific timeline for judgments after hearings. Norman responded that the default provision was aimed at cases where tenants do not appear at all, and he said the intent was to prevent abuse of the process. He also discussed the new RSA 540A language as a way to address serious health and safety problems, including unauthorized occupants and hoarding. Other testimony was generally supportive of the amendment as an improvement over the original bill, but several witnesses urged changes. New Hampshire Legal Assistance said it would likely be neutral if recommended edits were made, and suggested clarifying language, preserving the ability to strike defaults, and allowing longer stays by agreement of the parties. That witness and others argued that a 60-day cap could interfere with negotiated move-out agreements and could be too short in some cases, especially for elderly or disabled tenants. There was also discussion of narrowing the new 540A remedy to the specific person causing the problem, while preserving protections for innocent household members, particularly in domestic violence situations. No vote or final action was taken in the excerpt; the chair indicated the committee would consider revised language before executive session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Cases are going down.
• 01:16:02.159> already ongoing case already the case is already ongoing case already the case is
• So, once again, case-by-case basis.”
• So, once again, case-by-case basis.
• So once again, case by permanency plan. So once again, case by case<01:22:41.920> basis.

Keywords: Call to Order and Roll Call- 00:00:14 Staff Report on the Firefighter Commission Minimum Training Standards and Administrative Spending- 00:02:02 Response from the Kentucky Fire Commission-00:32:06 Judge Testimony on Child Removal-00:42:47 Update on Child Removal and Reunification-01:11:19 Staffing at Kentucky Veteran Centers-01:40:15 Adjournment-02:05:55, 958, all

Summary: The Legislative Oversight and Investigation Committee met without a quorum, so no votes were taken. Staff presented a study of the Kentucky Fire Commission focused on firefighter minimum training standards and administrative spending. The presentation explained that Kentucky’s training standards are built from NFPA guidelines, that the commission currently requires 115 hours for volunteer firefighters and 300 hours for paid firefighters, and that those reduced hours were adopted by removing electives and other non-NFPA content. Staff also said the commission’s IFSAC certification testing for firefighter 1 and firefighter 2 aligns with NFPA standards, but the commission cannot require local departments to train or certify firefighters. Staff recommended that the commission formally promulgate regulations establishing the reduced training hours and work with KCTCS to better separate administrative costs for certain programs so compliance with the statute can be demonstrated. The finance portion of the report said the commission is funded by general fund appropriations for State Fire Rescue Training and by an insurance premium surcharge that supports the Firefighter Foundation Program Fund. Staff reported that the commission stayed within the 5% administrative cap tied to the overall surcharge allotment, but could not confirm compliance with a separate 5% cap for specific programs because KCTCS accounting does not break out those costs in enough detail. Staff suggested the General Assembly may want to clarify what counts as administrative cost in statute. Members asked about investment returns, local fire department funding, and whether training documentation is required; staff said some of those topics were outside the study scope and that IFSAC testing relies on chief certification that a candidate is ready to test. Representatives from the Fire Commission then responded, saying they agreed with the report’s recommendations and would work to clarify the 5% issue with legislators and KCTCS. They explained that the reduction in training hours was intended to remove electives, better align with NFPA standards, and address the difficulty volunteer departments have in getting members to complete lengthy training. Commission officials said training is documented through rosters and annual compliance reviews, and that IFSAC-certified firefighter testing is based on demonstrated skills rather than a required number of training hours. They also said the difficulty in tracking the second 5% cap stems from the way KCTCS’s PeopleSoft system records reimbursements as single transactions, making it hard to isolate administrative costs by program.

Transcript Highlights:

• penalty cases, serious sex cases, child cases, uh, those once you get high enough, they're almost exclusively
• or district court MF cases uh cases or district court MF cases uh those<00:12:44.800> are<00:
• like death penalty cases, serious sex cases, child cases, uh, those once you get high enough, they're
• Um from a traffic case to a murder case.
• <00:48:30.480> to cases to prosecute, less cases to cases to prosecute, less cases to defend

Keywords: 0:00:04 Call to Order 0:00:50 Dept for Public Advocacy 0:51:31 Life Learning Center 1:21:06 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Justice and Judiciary heard testimony from the Department of Public Advocacy (DPA) on attorney compensation and alternatives to incarceration. Because the committee lacked a quorum, the chair skipped formal roll call and minutes approval, then invited DPA Public Advocate Damon Preston, Deputy Public Advocate Melanie Lowe, and alternative sentencing worker Cena/Tina Mills to present. Preston said DPA is fully state-funded, has 698 funded positions, and was near full staffing with 673 filled positions and 42 new law graduates expected to join in August. He argued that DPA’s resources lag behind those of prosecutors, noting that local prosecutorial offices receive substantially more total funding and have additional revenue sources beyond the state budget. Preston focused on salary disparities and turnover. He said DPA trial-office attorneys total about $26 million in salaries, compared with about $41.9 million for prosecutors on publicly listed state funding, and estimated that more than 100 additional prosecutors are paid through other sources, bringing total prosecutor compensation to a little over $50 million versus DPA’s $26 million. He said starting DPA attorney pay is $58,200, experienced attorney pay averages about $73,000, and that these levels are too low given law school debt and the state’s constitutional obligation to provide defense counsel. He also said DPA attorney turnover is about 20%, median service time before separation was 15 months in 2024, and exit interviews often cite salary as the main reason for leaving. He gave examples of former DPA attorneys moving to prosecutor offices for raises ranging from 12% to 50%. Committee members asked about how often defendants are represented by private counsel versus DPA and how that affects workload. Preston said a 2017 study found about 50% of misdemeanor cases and about 75% of circuit court cases were handled by DPA, with DPA handling most of the most labor-intensive cases. He said DPA will step aside when a defendant hires private counsel or is found ineligible, and he acknowledged the system historically erred by denying counsel in some cases, though he said the current concern is whether DPA is now appointed too broadly. Members requested updated trend data on appointments over the past decade. Preston also described DPA’s pay scale and said the agency’s compensation structure makes retention difficult. Mills then described DPA’s alternative sentencing worker program, which she said has operated for about 20 years and has received national recognition. She shared a case example involving a client named Patrick, who faced a prison sentence on a possession charge and was referred to a horse-based treatment and certification program in Shelbyville. She said the client wanted treatment and a fresh start, a bed became available, and she and the client’s attorney presented an alternative sentencing plan to the court. The presentation was interrupted briefly by a technical issue, but the testimony continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I can't speak to all the cases, only the, the case that I really followed.
• Uh, I won't rehash some of the cases, although I will point out a few things about two of those cases
• And the case law is clear.
• They intervened into a CPS case.
• of the case law.

Bills: HB116

Keywords: film industry, incentives, economic development, state funding, media production

Transcript Highlights:

• Felony cases and case processing time is significantly longer than misdemeanors.
• is between $650 and $700 per case.
• cases.
• August for child welfare cases, and October for juvenile delinquency cases.
• As you heard, there's a number of cases have risen, and the number of attorneys to handle the cases have

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• From the chart we did provide, we consider over 64,000 cases for paroling. role in nearly 15,000 cases
• The case will be argued next.
• The other case...
• that we handle, in capital cases, when we aren't able to handle cases.
• The case law is not clear. There's a case out of, I believe, Pecos or El Paso area.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• case processing times and the backlog of overage cases.
• But I am concerned about the case in particular, and probably because it's such a big case and national
• case, I need to dig into that some more.
• Just real quick, can you speak to the Eastman case?
• But, you know, what is your current role in that case?

Summary: The Senate Committee on Rules established a quorum and first approved several items without required appearances, including the appointments of Rick Simpson to the Commission on Teacher Credentialing and Trinidad Solis, M.D., and Gerald Talbert, M.D., to the Medical Board of California, along with references of bills to committees and floor acknowledgments. The committee then heard testimony on two State Bar of California appointments requiring appearance: George Cardona, J.D., for Chief Trial Counsel, and Laura Enderton Speed, J.D., for Executive Director. Cardona described his first four years as chief trial counsel, emphasizing reforms after the Girardi matter, including stronger conflict-of-interest and gift rules, tighter trust-account investigations, more data tracking, and efforts to reduce case backlogs and discipline disparities. Senators questioned him about the John Eastman disbarment case, the office’s role and jurisdiction, racial and Latino discipline disparities, unauthorized practice of law by notarios, staffing vacancies, and the use of AI in pleadings and internal work. Public witnesses from the State Bar, SEIU Local 1000, and others supported his confirmation, and the committee voted 3-0 to advance his appointment to the full Senate. Enderton Speed said she sought the executive director role to help restore public trust, strengthen discipline and admissions, and address the February 2025 bar exam problems. Senators asked about the State Bar’s budget deficit, hiring freeze, long-term fiscal stability, the bar exam audit and litigation, safeguards against conflicts and gifts, and the decision to move the February exam largely remote before returning to in-person administration for July. Public witnesses also supported her confirmation, citing leadership, accessibility, and a focus on core functions. The committee voted 5-0 to advance her appointment to the full Senate. The meeting ended with remarks honoring Senator Jones on his final day on the committee and a cake presentation before adjournment to executive session.

Transcript Highlights:

• That causes complaints from the other parties in those other cases, that they can't get their cases moved
• They feel overwhelmed, like you said, with those cases, in addition to the criminal... ...or civil cases
• the high number of abuse and neglect cases.
• in addition to the criminal or civil cases that they have and it's not just the number of cases it's
• But should it not be the case, it should certainly move forward.

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Summary: The committee first considered House Bill 4893, which would increase penalties for contempt of magistrate court and raise the maximum fine a court may impose without a jury trial. Counsel explained that the bill would raise fines for first, second, and third offenses, add community service, and allow weekend jail or work release for a third offense. The committee adopted the strike-and-insert amendment, reported the bill to the full Senate with a recommendation that it do pass, and adopted a title amendment. The committee then took up House Bill 5684, a pilot program creating child protection commissioners to help handle abuse and neglect cases. Counsel and the sponsor described the proposal as a way to reduce circuit court backlog, improve the frequency and consistency of hearings, and provide more focused attention to children and families while leaving final decision-making authority with circuit judges. Supporters cited the heavy caseloads, shortages of guardians ad litem, and a Texas model that reportedly improved efficiency; one senator criticized the bill as adding bureaucracy, while others said the system needs a new approach. Members discussed funding through a companion bill tied to the medical cannabis fund, with an initial startup amount and ongoing annual support. Several senators raised concerns about the lack of a sunset date and the need for measurable outcomes. The committee adopted an amendment requiring the Supreme Court’s Administrative Director to identify measurable outcomes, establish a pre-implementation baseline, and provide annual reporting to the Joint Committee on Government and Finance, including costs and projected costs. House Bill 5684, as amended, was then reported to the full Senate with a recommendation that it do pass.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have two high courts deciding civil and criminal cases, and there could be cases where the courts
• The way any other case reaches the Supreme Court of Texas is the way these kinds of cases would reach
• It would be a lifeline on potential death penalty cases and post-conviction cases, and it could be used
• Of course, we won't be able to ask him about any pending cases or about any case that might come before
• the court. ...to ask him about any pending cases or about any case that might come before the court,

Bills: SB16, SB76, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB827, SB964, SB1209, SB1210, SB1386, SB1470, SB2035, SJR37

Keywords: voter registration, proof of citizenship, Election Code, criminal offenses, limited federal ballot, transportation, infrastructure, funding, public safety, state regulation, election, polling places, voter access, state oversight, electronic voting, voting, polling place, elections, countywide program, election integrity

Summary: The Senate Committee on State Affairs met and heard several bills related to legislative process and court jurisdiction. Senate Bill 1386, by Senator Huffman, would change compelled legislative testimony from blanket transactional immunity to testimonial immunity, allowing compelled statements or documents to be used against a witness in criminal prosecution only if not derived from the compelled testimony, while preserving protection against perjury and false statements and retaining the right to counsel. No public witnesses testified, and the bill was left pending. The committee then heard Senate Bill 1470, by Chairman Hughes, which would require DPS to share existing data on cross-state driver’s license cancellations with the Secretary of State for voter-roll maintenance. Hughes said the bill does not create new data collection and is intended to improve list maintenance. A DPS resource witness was present, there was no substantive opposition, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 1210, also by Hughes, would address conflicts between the Texas Supreme Court and the Court of Criminal Appeals on constitutional questions by making the Supreme Court the final arbiter in limited circumstances. Chris Hilton supported the bill, but Allen Place, Jack Rohde, and Philip Furlow opposed it, arguing it was unconstitutional, unnecessary, and could create practical problems in criminal post-conviction litigation. The bill was left pending after testimony. The committee also heard Senate Bill 311, which would conform the Government Code to the Texas Constitution by clarifying the Supreme Court’s original writ authority against lower courts and officials other than the governor. Justice Evan Young and Chris Hilton supported the bill as a clarification of existing authority, while no one testified against it; the bill was left pending. The committee then recessed to allow the chamber to rearrange for the Senate session.

Transcript Highlights:

• > had<00:06:07.600> occurred were several cases that had occurred were several cases that
• So I've seen these cases.
• 48.520> are<00:12:48.600> very cases of assaults, which are very cases of assaults, which
• Um, the other cases unfortunately<00:23:24.200> are<00:23:24.320> cases<00:23:24.760>
• , about the most extremely bad cases, about the most extremely bad cases, we're<00:35:23.040>

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 963, which would make crimes against elders age 60 and over strict liability offenses by removing the requirement that the perpetrator knew or should have known the victim’s age. The Office of the Public Defender opposed the bill, arguing that removing the state-of-mind element would create unfair and subjective results and suggesting sentencing enhancements or broader vulnerability-based language instead. Supporters, including Sandy Wong and another testifier with elder-abuse experience, said the current knowledge requirement creates a loophole that lets offenders avoid the elder enhancement even when they target vulnerable older adults. No vote was taken on the measure in the portion provided. The committee also heard HB 384, which increases penalties for promoting minor-produced sexual images, extends probation terms for felony obscenity offenses, tolls the statute of limitations during a victim’s minority, and requires sex offender registration for certain felony obscenity offenses involving minors. The Public Defender opposed the bill as overly broad and warned of absurd results, while the Department of the Prosecuting Attorney supported it, saying the bill addresses sextortion and other exploitation cases where adults solicit images from minors and that the 3-year age-gap threshold preserves ordinary teen relationships. Committee members questioned whether the bill was aimed at adults only and whether the age-gap carveout was narrow enough; the prosecutor said it was intended to cover adult predators and not consensual peer conduct. No final action was reported. HB 1100, which renames the Neighbor Islands Blind and Visually Impaired Service Pilot Program to use “low vision” instead of “visually impaired,” was supported by the Department of Human Services and disability advocates, who said the current term is derogatory and that the change responds to the blind community. The department said it was beginning work on administrative rules and expected to seek an appropriation, with implementation hoped for in 2026. The committee then heard HB 1283, exempting paternity proceedings from mediation when domestic abuse is alleged; the Hawaii State Coalition Against Domestic Violence and others supported it as consistent with divorce law and important for survivor safety. HB 689, creating safe harbor protections for survivors of sexual exploitation who seek medical or law enforcement help, drew support from HPD, Emua Alliance, the Judiciary, and others, who said it would prevent traffickers from using prostitution charges to silence victims. Finally, HB 383, reinstating mandatory minimum jail terms for successive violations of protective orders and removing the court’s ability to suspend those minimums, drew opposition from the Public Defender, who said some repeat violations stem from mental health or substance use issues, and support from the Prosecuting Attorney, who argued the bill treats protective orders like temporary restraining orders and preserves judicial discretion within a misdemeanor framework.

Transcript Highlights:

• that case.
• that case.
• that case.
• that case.
• that case.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House took up Senate File 4760, a public safety package, and first adopted an amendment to insert House language into the Senate file. Members then heard brief explanations of several included provisions, including a section from House File 3870 that would make Office of Justice Programs research and victim-related data private, clarify privacy for data collected by the Missing and Murdered Black Women and Girls office and the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Relatives office, and remove outdated statutory language. Representative Novotny also described the package as combining a number of previously passed stand-alone bills and a few additional provisions. The chamber then adopted amendments A5, A7, and A8. A5 inserted House language and adjusted an effective date related to public employer discretion in hiring; A7 allowed the Office of Legislative Auditor to request BCA fingerprinting and federal tax information as required by federal rules; and A8 clarified language affecting jail medical services and custody-related safeguards after collaboration among Representative Witty, the sheriffs association, the Department of Corrections, and advocates. Representatives Hansen, Moller, and Witty all urged support for those changes. A proposed A3 amendment from Representative Duran, which would have kept the current age of delinquency rather than implementing the previously enacted change, drew extensive debate. Supporters argued counties, law enforcement, and other stakeholders were not ready for the change and lacked infrastructure, while opponents said the 2024 law was intended to address serious gaps in juvenile justice and child welfare and should take effect as planned. After a roll call, the House rejected A3 by a vote of 66 yeas to 67 nays. The transcript then indicates another Duran amendment, A2, was called up, but the excerpt ends before its disposition.

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:41:01.560> cases delinquencies sentence related cases delinquencies sentence related cases
• > combined<01:41:15.320> with cases the high case load combined with cases the high case
• what cases get charged.
• 02:02:30.239> case<02:02:30.440> loads down um have the case have case loads down um have
• criminal cases.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony from Insurance Commissioner DJ Bettencourt on the New Hampshire Insurance Department budget. He said the department is self-funded through assessments on insurers based on New Hampshire premium volume, with about $8 billion in premiums written in the state and a department budget of roughly $15.5 million. He explained that the department has 88 authorized positions, eight vacancies, and that three full-time positions were unfunded after the governor’s requested 4% reduction exercise. He also said the department is trying to balance staffing needs with not overburdening carriers during a hard insurance market. A major topic was the department’s $2.6 million rebate to industry from the prior fiscal year, which Bettencourt described as a credit against the next assessment rather than a direct cash payment. Members questioned why that credit was not reflected as a reduction in the upcoming budget, and Bettencourt and staff explained that the budget assumes full staffing and full spending, with any year-end surplus returned to insurers. The commissioner said the department had added staff in recent years for succession planning and to preserve institutional expertise, and that the rebate reflects careful budgeting rather than excess spending. Members also asked about staffing changes by division, including positions unfunded in fraud, property and casualty examinations, life and health examinations, and tax. Bettencourt said fraud investigations remain strong and that the department can use outside contractors for examinations, with those costs billed to the company being examined. He also described the department’s examination process, including periodic financial exams and targeted market conduct reviews triggered by consumer complaints or trends. Additional questions covered OIT transfers, the department’s oversight of fully insured health coverage, the insurance premium tax and fines going to the general fund, and the department’s limited role in auto repair reimbursement disputes, where he said complaints have recently declined.

Transcript Highlights:

• In that case, there was a that case.
• of cases is a case involving Duke Kanamoku, the so-called Duncan v.
• lines of cases is um a case involving lines of cases is um a case involving Duke<00:36:31.839>
• versus Kanamoku case, which was a case versus Kanamoku case, which was a case um<00:36:36.240>
• scenario,<00:59:15.119> an that case, but worst case scenario, an that case, but worst case

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee held an informational briefing on federal and state authority over National Guard deployment in response to civil protest or unrest, prompted by recent federal actions and the California litigation in Newsom v. Trump. The chair explained the purpose was to help lawmakers and the public understand the legal background, the status of the California case, and possible Hawaii policy responses. David Day of the Attorney General’s office outlined several recent federal immigration-related executive actions and enforcement directives, then described Hawaii’s participation in multiple lawsuits challenging federal funding conditions, data-sharing demands, and the birthright citizenship order. A major portion of the briefing focused on Newsom v. Trump. Day summarized the June 2025 Los Angeles protests and the president’s memorandum federalizing National Guard units under 10 U.S.C. 12406, which California challenged as ultra vires, procedurally improper, and violative of the Posse Comitatus Act, the Tenth Amendment, and the APA. He said the district court initially granted relief, but the Ninth Circuit stayed the TRO and held, in a published decision, that review under section 12406 is highly deferential and that the president lawfully exercised authority under paragraph 3. He also noted California-law issues about orders being issued through the governor, and said Hawaii had supported California through amicus briefs and would continue to do so; the bench trial was scheduled for August 11-13. Members then asked how Hawaii law differs from California’s and whether the Ninth Circuit ruling would control here. Day said the standard-of-review aspects would likely apply, but the California-specific procedural language about orders issued in the governor’s name does not appear in Hawaii law. The committee also heard from Colonel Lloyd C. Phelps of the Hawaii Department of Defense, who explained that National Guard activations generally occur under Title 10 federal orders, state orders, or other statuses, and said the June 2025 federalization mechanism was a Title 10 call-up. He began addressing the president’s authority, the Posse Comitatus Act, and Hawaii’s own preparedness, but the discussion was cut short and members indicated they would return to the topic later. No votes were taken.