Transcript Highlights:

• all the cases that we're reviewing.
• They completed 252 cases and issued 42 referrals.
• The motion is setting that out in this case.
• In other cases, In other cases, we're just adopting one budget recommendation or another.
• Cases come our way whether we want them to or not.

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:

• That is the case.
• Um, in the case of a person who's self-employed, they would need to provide that.
• Um, in the case of a person who's self-employed, they would need to provide that.
• c><01:17:26.400> person<01:17:26.560> who's in the case of a person who's in the case of
• In the case of somebody who is um that.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, in the case of the Milani High School project, as Mr.
• How many cases do you get a year? About 400 cases a year.
• So they each have about 25 to 30 cases.
• 400<01:04:44.319> cases<01:04:44.799> a year about 400 cases a year about 400 cases
• sentence repeats in the department case sentence repeats in the department case they<01:20:49.080

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the course of the teny, in which case the course of the teny, in which case he'll<01:42:25.760><
• How would you decide in this case versus this case?
• Um, what win many of those cases.
• cite an area of law. um for case law. cite an area of law. um for case law.
• worker who's done a lot of case worker who's done a lot of case management<03:10:32.399> over

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Housing Committee opened with a public hearing on HB 196, which would repeal the Housing Champion program. Representative Matt Drew, the prime sponsor, argued the program is an unnecessary and poorly targeted subsidy, saying it rewards municipalities after projects are completed and may not be limited to new housing production. He questioned the transparency of the program, cited difficulty finding required annual reports, and noted a fiscal note suggesting the state could recover up to $3 million if obligations are terminated. Committee members and witnesses debated whether the program’s criteria amount to political favoritism or a standard grant process; supporters said the rubric is specific and that municipalities are evaluated against objective requirements. Representative Priest, Nick Taylor of Housing Action New Hampshire, and Karen Benfield of Stay Work Play New Hampshire all opposed repeal, saying the program encourages local zoning and regulatory changes, helps smaller communities participate, and supports housing supply and young people’s ability to stay in the state. The hearing on HB 196 was then closed. The committee then opened a hearing on HB 1405, a bill establishing an affordable housing guarantee program within the Housing Finance Authority. Prime sponsor Representative Chris Muns said the bill would reduce lender risk by guaranteeing up to 80% of principal on qualifying loans for affordable housing, with a cap of $30 million per lender per year and $300 million outstanding at any time. He described the measure as a low-cost public-private partnership backed by the full faith and credit of the state, and said it was identical to a prior Senate bill that had received unanimous bipartisan committee support before dying later in the process. He framed the bill as one part of a broader housing package aimed at financing, infrastructure, workforce, zoning reform, and other housing-related issues. No votes were taken during the portion of the meeting provided. The only formal actions were opening and closing the public hearing on HB 196 and opening the public hearing on HB 1405, with testimony continuing on HB 1405 at the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• , chancellor that over hears the case, chancellor that over hears the case, will<01:18:26.120>
• the more serious of the serious uh cases the more serious of the serious uh cases whether<01:44:
• , most of the judges that I've dealt with would send these cases back or would send these cases back
• a case like that? a case like that?
• convince them that that's not the case. convince them that that's not the case.

Keywords: MS House Floor - 31 March, 2026; 10:00 AM, 925, all

Summary: The House convened with prayer, a guest vocalist, and the Pledge of Allegiance before moving into routine business. Members first recognized several special guests and school groups, including championship teams from Simpson County Academy, New Albany High School, Tougaloo College, Madison-Richland Academy, East Rankin Academy, Morton High School, and others, along with honorees such as Dr. Katrina Cox, Pamela Moody, Joe Helen Joey Walker, and Jimmy Carr. The chamber also noted a prior resolution honoring Reverend Dr. Victor Dixon and the Copiah County Ministerial Alliance, and Dr. Dixon led the opening prayer. On the calendar, the House adopted a conference report on House Bill 1752 dealing with judicial salaries. The report set new salary amounts for state court judges effective January 1, 2027, froze district attorney salary increases until January 1, 2028, and then tied DAs to 95% of circuit and chancery judges’ pay. It also removed mandatory raise language for judges and county court judges, and members briefly discussed the broader issue of legislative compensation. The report passed 115-2. The House then adopted a conference report on House Bill 377, the missing persons bill, which clarified definitions, added forensic genetic genealogy testing provisions, and set timelines for law enforcement to enter credible missing-person reports into NamUs and NCIC. That report passed 120-0. The chamber also adopted a conference report on House Bill 525, changing the penalty for sexual battery in a position of trust or authority from a 0-to-30-year range to a 5-to-30-year range; it passed 112-0. Later, the House adopted a conference report on House Bill 925 after removing veto-message language, and adopted another conference report on House Bill 939 combining a low-sat repealer change and a fire truck acquisition program that creates a Fire Equipment Fund supported by recurring black tag revenue. The House also approved unanimous-consent amendments to Senate Bill 3105 and recommitted Senate Bill 2747 for further work.

Transcript Highlights:

• >> used in either sense in that case. >> used in either sense in that case.
• And just uh in case introduced it.
• of that case. That's the bottom line. of that case. That's the bottom line.
• be thinking about every day in any case. be thinking about every day in any case.
• And we had a bill, some of some cases.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• we're still working through those cases. we're still working through those cases.
• <01:45:39.840> and worked through that entire case and worked through that entire case and
• the case and the guts of the computer. the case and the guts of the computer.
• information to work those kind of cases. information to work those kind of cases.
• example that was set with that case example that was set with that case helped<03:23:48.399>

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• we've handled, how many cases we've settled, how many cases the attorney general's office has settled
• So that's kind of our case.
• we've handled how about how many cases we've handled how many<00:07:44.400> case<00:07:44.720
• many case we've settled how many cases many case we've settled how many cases the<00:07:46.880><
• One of our teams is hearing cases today. I'll be hearing cases again this week.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This is not a case Or refusals to take specific actions.
• I'm talking based on an SJC statement on a decisive case.
• And that same case says it, at least the NBTA case. We'd like citation.
• I believe I have it. 430 Mass. 791, I believe, is the case.
• So, 780,000 cases. Okay. Honestly, that's helpful. And then, prior senators, we're...

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on whether the Office of the State Auditor may constitutionally audit the Massachusetts Legislature under Chapter 250 of the Acts of 2024 and what such an audit could include under generally accepted government auditing standards. Chair Cindy Friedman opened by explaining the background: voters approved Ballot Question 1 in November 2024, the law took effect in January 2025, and the Auditor then initiated audits of both chambers. The chair said the subcommittee was seeking expert testimony because the proposed audit scope, constitutionality, and possible bias concerns remained unresolved. Public testimony was invited, but no members of the public pre-registered; written testimony remained open for a short period after the hearing. The hearing then proceeded with invited experts on constitutional law/state government and auditing-related issues. Professor Lawrence Friedman testified that the ballot initiative’s approval by the Attorney General and by voters did not resolve constitutional questions, and he argued Chapter 250 violates the Massachusetts Constitution. He said the Legislature has constitutional authority to set its own rules and manage its proceedings, and that an executive-branch audit would intrude on legislative deliberation, speech and debate protections, and separation of powers. He also warned that even audits of supposedly administrative matters could become a vehicle for repeated document demands and litigation that would indirectly burden legislative functioning. In questioning, senators pressed him on the line between administrative and deliberative functions, the role of the Attorney General versus the courts, the possibility of retroactive audit scope, and whether prior legislative consent to audits mattered; he said prior consent would not bind future legislatures and that constitutionality is ultimately for the courts. Professor Ray La Raja also opposed the audit, framing it as a threat to institutional independence and representative democracy. He argued that allowing an executive-branch official to audit the Legislature without consent would upset separation of powers, chill internal debate, and create a precedent for broader executive intrusion. He said voters often support “transparency” reforms without fully appreciating institutional consequences, and that legislatures should defend their autonomy, especially amid what he described as broader executive overreach nationally. Senators asked about chilling effects, the practical distinction between administrative and core legislative functions, and whether the courts or the Legislature should resolve the issue; he said the courts would ultimately adjudicate disputes, but the Legislature should not waive its constitutional authority lightly. Jean Kempthorne took the opposite view, arguing the audit is permissible and should proceed. She said the state auditor is a constitutional officer accountable directly to the people, that the audit power can be expanded by statute, and that separation of powers does not require watertight compartments. She contended the audit would not displace core legislative powers because the auditor can only evaluate operations, report findings, and make recommendations. She also argued the Legislature itself already conducts audits of other branches, so it is inconsistent to claim an audit of the Legislature is unconstitutional. In response to senators’ questions, she said there are guardrails against truly intrusive requests, but that the administrative-versus-legislative distinction is not a workable bright line; she suggested disputes should be handled case by case, with objections, negotiation, or litigation if specific requests go too far. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• cases that have previously<00:03:02.959> gone<00:03:03.200> unprosecuted.
• It establishes a post- disaster cases.
• is that by the time enough reports case is that by the time enough reports got<00:05:03.440> to
• , what we've seen in a lot of these cases, what we've seen in a lot of these cases, particularly<
• So what it does moving these cases in.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Call to Order and Roll Call 00:29 Discussion SB 153 01:25 Vote SB 153 10:35 Discussion SB 118 11:36 Vote SB 118 12:48 Discussion HB 380 13:40 Vote HB 380 40:12, 958, all

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Banking and Insurance met with a quorum and took up three bills. Senate Bill 153, sponsored by Sen. Greg Elkins, aimed to combat insurance fraud tied to post-disaster contractor scams. Testimony from the Attorney General’s Office and committee members described problems involving roofing, siding, and debris-removal scams, including vandalism used to create claims and companies that disappear before victims can recover losses. The bill would expand enforcement tools by making certain vandalism-related conduct criminal, giving the Attorney General concurrent jurisdiction with local prosecutors, creating a post-disaster contractor registry, and banning door-to-door solicitation during declared emergencies. The committee approved the bill by roll call and sent it forward with a favorable recommendation. Senate Bill 118, sponsored by Sen. Brandon Storm, addressed credit property insurance offered by consumer loan companies. The sponsor and a representative of the Kentucky Consumer Finance Association explained that the product has been offered for years and that the bill would provide statutory authority for its continued use. The committee raised no substantive objections, and the bill passed on a roll call vote with a favorable recommendation. House Bill 380, sponsored by Rep. Tom Smith, focused on regulating cryptocurrency kiosks in convenience stores to curb fraud against seniors. The committee heard emotional testimony from a sheriff and a fraud victim describing scams that led victims to deposit cash into crypto kiosks, often under pressure from callers posing as authorities or relatives. AARP Kentucky supported the bill, citing widespread losses to older adults and the need for guardrails. A committee substitute was adopted that would cap daily transactions at $2,000, require fee disclosure and customer consent, impose licensing and compliance requirements, mandate identification for transactions, and add criminal penalties and Attorney General enforcement. Members discussed the bill’s scope, including that it would not address gift card scams, and noted the delayed effective date was requested so regulators could write rules. The committee adopted the substitute and then passed the bill favorably on roll call.

Transcript Highlights:

• I know of no cases of a Bigfoot being found in the state of Texas.
• In this case... So there are all these...
• But this safety is an... ...always the case.
• But that's not the case. It was a bathroom bill over and over again.
• Media reports indicated that in most or all cases...

Bills: HB7, SB 8, HB7, SB 8

Keywords: abortion, healthcare, jurisdiction, civil action, qui tam, prohibition, state law, sex designation, restroom access, civil penalties, private civil right of action, women's privacy, 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They make a really good case that there's fraud. Great presentation.
• They already send cases there today.
• They already send those cases that they find to the Office of Elections and Crimes.
• They will be so inundated with election fraud cases that are simply... ...with election fraud cases that
• My mom now actually falls into this category, but that wasn't the case a few years ago.

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a series of member introductions recognizing interns, pages, volunteers, and the retirement of Pastor Gary Austin from the sergeant’s office. Leadership also announced that budget talks with the House were continuing and that senators would not need to plan on being in next week, suggesting progress toward a budget framework. After routine floor business, the chamber took up a major third-reading measure on citizen initiatives and several education bills, followed later by returning messages from the House on health and school-safety measures. The most extensive debate centered on the citizen initiative bill, which sponsors said was intended to protect the constitutional amendment process from fraud and abuse based on election-crime investigations and a large state report on petition fraud. Supporters argued the bill would add reasonable guardrails, prevent misuse of public funds, and preserve integrity while still allowing grassroots participation. Opponents from both parties argued it would make citizen-led amendments much harder by adding costs, deadlines, criminal penalties, and administrative burdens that would chill participation and favor wealthy or corporate interests. After lengthy debate, the Senate voted 28-10 to pass the bill. The chamber then passed several education measures with little or no opposition, including bills tied to Bright Futures, dual enrollment, Florida ABLE, teacher preparation, and other education policy updates, all by 38-0. Later, the Senate concurred in House amendments on a stem cell therapy bill, an EKG requirement for student athletes, and a cardiac emergency bill, each passing 37-0. The House also sent back a school safety bill with amendments affecting child care facility partnerships with law enforcement, temporary door locks during active assailant incidents, supervision windows, and funding for panic alarm systems; the transcript ends as that bill is being explained.

Transcript Highlights:

• Unfortunately, that is not the case here in California.
• Years, it ramped up to around $4 billion a year, in some cases five.
• It's something you have to come back in many cases every five or seven years to redo.
• I’d love to be convinced differently if that’s the case.
• In some cases, we're pretty far along, have done the planning.

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee No. 4 hearing focused on the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) and cap-and-trade reauthorization, with members and panelists discussing how to balance climate goals, affordability, and legislative oversight. The chair emphasized the hearing as a broad review of past GGRF spending and future options, while the LAO outlined how GGRF revenues are generated, how variable they have been, and the tradeoffs between continuous appropriations and annual budget control. Two academic panelists, Dr. Kyle Meng and Danny Cullen Ward, argued that cap-and-trade remains an effective climate policy, but stressed that future revenue will depend heavily on market design, allowance allocation, and price levels. They also raised the idea that GGRF could be used more directly for affordability, especially by lowering electricity costs, and for targeted investments in technologies that the market would not otherwise support. Committee members pressed the panelists on where revenues come from, how much has actually been spent, and whether continuous appropriations reduce oversight. CARB staff said more than $33 billion has been generated to date and a little over $11–12 billion has been spent, with the rest committed or in process, and noted that project timelines can be lengthy. Members also asked about ways to lower electricity rates, reduce wildfire-related utility liabilities, and support electrification. The panelists said transportation fuels are the largest source of GGRF revenue, that industrial emitters receive a smaller share of free allowances, and that reducing wildfire liability and investing in grid-scale batteries could help lower costs and speed decarbonization. Public commenters largely urged the Legislature to preserve or expand continuous appropriations for specific climate programs. Speakers supported funding for nature-based solutions, natural and working lands, urban greening, agricultural climate solutions, waste and composting programs, clean transportation, AB 617 community air protection, clean cars, transit, affordable housing near transit, and dairy digesters. Several groups argued these programs are cost-effective, provide public health and affordability benefits, and should receive dedicated shares of GGRF. Others urged reducing free allowances and using more GGRF revenue to directly lower energy costs for households. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Human Trafficking Hotline, Texas is historically ranked as #2 in the nation for human trafficking case
• This isn't concerning ourselves with why it matters besides a case of otherism.
• Well, so in this case, who's deciding so far, the city council or what? The city manager?
• Our position is that it should be handled on a case by case basis without potentially shutting down libraries
• It does seem like something a parent should handle individually on a case by case basis.

Bills: HB 45, HB 755, HB 1232, HB 1555, HB 2460, HB 2702, HB 2973, HB 3120, HB 3225, HB 3314, HB 3356, HB 3371, HB 3634, HB 3638, HB 4247, HB 4283, HB 4290, HB 4302, HB 4503, HB 4511, HB 4565, HB 4581, HB 4627, HB 4632, HB 4660, HB 4668, HB 4960, HB 5042

Keywords: housing, affordable housing, rent control, landlord-tenant laws, housing rights, lobbying, public entities, expenditures, government code, transparency, Texas Ethics Commission, government regulation, lobbying restrictions, government accountability, taxpayer money, HB 1232, whistleblower, whistleblower protection, public employee, retaliation

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it depends on a on a case by case situation.
• I am here just to be as a resource in case you have any questions.
• Let's survey the type of cases this bill would shield from liability.
• And in this case we're putting gun owners. I myself as a father, as a gun owner.
• The jurors in this case are completely hamstrung by the current statute and how it's written.

Transcript Highlights:

• This extension would be very key for DUI cases, which involve operating a vehicle under the influence
• all of those cases would be reversed, and that would be terrible for public safety.
• all of those cases would be reversed, and that would be terrible for public safety.
• all of those cases would be reversed, and that would be terrible for public safety.
• about 105 fatalities and in most cases about 105 fatalities and in most cases speed<00:38:43.040

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs heard several transportation and public safety measures on March 28, 2025. SB 1195 would prohibit parking within certain distances of crosswalks and intersections, direct parking fine revenue to the Safe Routes to School special fund, and remove the need for signs or curb markings in some cases. The Department of Transportation, Department of Health, and Ulupono Initiative supported the bill, emphasizing improved visibility, pedestrian safety, and funding for school-route improvements; written testimony included both support and one opposition. No vote was taken during the hearing segment provided. The committee also heard SB 1102 on the aircraft rescue firefighting unit chief, which would set term-based appointment provisions for the airport division’s fire chief. DOT supported the measure, saying it would give the director flexibility to select leadership and adapt to changing needs, while a member asked about current removal procedures for underperforming employees. The bill was presented as a management and leadership measure, with no action taken in the excerpt. SB 1216, addressing noisy mufflers and safety inspection requirements, drew DOT support in principle but concern that existing rules already cover inspection standards and that enforcement after inspection remains difficult; DOT also described a planned noise-detection camera pilot on Oʻahu. Testimony included support from neighborhood and advocacy groups and opposition from three individuals. For SB 30, which would require helmets for moped riders under 21, DOT and HPD supported the bill, citing crash data and injury prevention; testimony was evenly split overall, with six in support and six in opposition. SB 344 would require helmets for skateboard users under 18; DOT supported it, and a DOT witness explained current helmet rules for other devices such as e-bikes, scooters, and motorcycles. SB 1095, increasing decal size limits for special number plates, drew DOT concerns that larger decals could interfere with plate readability and automated enforcement. SB 1522 would make proof of filing required vehicle-transfer notice forms a complete defense to actions arising from the vehicle’s later use or abandonment; the Judiciary said it had no position on the bill’s merits but objected to language requiring new court forms and raised access and legal-advice concerns, while Honolulu’s Department of Customer Services supported the measure. The committee then heard SB 597, extending the deadline for the Administrative Driver’s License Revocation Office to issue written review decisions. The Attorney General and DOT supported the extension, citing limited toxicology capacity and shipping delays for testing, and several law enforcement and public health entities also supported it. In contrast, the ADLRO hearing officer testified with serious concerns about due process, warning that eliminating or delaying the review process could create constitutional problems, disproportionately burden people without attorneys, and jeopardize thousands of cases. Finally, SB 1285 proposed a tiered revocation system for DUI arrests; ADLRO strongly opposed it on due process grounds, while DOT supported it as a safety measure and the Hawaii Public Health Institute commented that evidence is lacking for standalone mandatory revocation and suggested stronger impaired-driving standards instead. The committee had not yet taken final action in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, that with that being the case, case, case, um who is uh let's see the next bill um who is uh let's
• So that being the case, Senator Almond. So that being the case, Senator Almond.
• So with that being that the case then So with that being that the case then So with that being that the
• And I do not see that as being the case. I see not see that as being the case.
• So in this case you see the same thing. They this case you see the same thing.

Bills: SB199, HB142, SB86, HB152, HB297, SB1, SB1

Keywords: parental leave, state employees, local education agencies, adoption, work-life balance, family support, portable benefits, portable benefit account, independent contractor, gig worker, 1099 worker, freelancer, app-based worker, rideshare, delivery driver, worker benefits, health insurance, retirement benefits, life insurance, income replacement insurance

Transcript Highlights:

• We investigate each and every one of those cases.
• We are able to resolve many, many hundreds, sometimes thousands a year, and we select certain cases to
• We've always seen those cases, right?
• But those cases have always been part of the docket that we have.
• However, we do have jurisdiction to investigate, and in some cases stop, discriminatory evictions.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on State Administration met to hear the Civil Rights Department’s budget items, with the chair opening by emphasizing that agency directors should appear in person if they want their items heard. Go-Biz was not heard because its director was absent. The department outlined four chaptered-legislation implementation items: SB 464 on updated pay data reporting categories, AB 822 extending the Commission on the State of Hate, AB 935 expanding data collection and reporting, and SB 518 creating the Bureau for Descendants of American Slavery. The Department of Finance and Legislative Analyst’s Office had no concerns with these proposals. Members then asked about the department’s broader workload and role in responding to discrimination, hate incidents, and immigration-related fears in communities. CRD explained that it handles complaints in areas such as housing, employment, public accommodations, hate crimes, and human trafficking, but does not have jurisdiction over the federal government or landlord-tenant law generally. Officials said filings and open matters have risen sharply, with the department nearing 12,000 open matters, and described outreach in multiple languages, immigrant-serving work, and support for victims through T and U visa-related assistance. They also discussed the Commission on the State of Hate, the California vs. Hate hotline, and coordination with Stop the Hate grantees and community organizations. The committee also heard items on ongoing workload for AB 2188, AB 1041, and AB 1949, which would convert limited-term resources to permanent positions because workload has met or exceeded initial estimates. The LAO had no concerns. A final item requested $502,000 for ongoing security guard services at CRD public counters after more than a dozen threats to staff since July 2024; the LAO again had no concerns. Members expressed support for the security request and discussed the need for safe public-facing offices. No votes were taken, and each item was closed after discussion and public comment.

Transcript Highlights:

• The judge has said this individual, the defendant in This case requires the defendant to stay away and
• But if in any case a couple of one of my clients or anybody accused violates a no contact provision,
• whether it be no contact with the victim or no contact with kids in a sexual case.
• didn't see them behind the wheel, but I'm how does an officer make that arrest in that misdemeanor case
• It would just be on the word of a lay person, which and in most cases, it's probably valid.

Transcript Highlights:

• not just the dollars, but the real-world impact of these victories, I want to highlight a few of our cases
• In this case, the condition involved requiring that we engage in immigration enforcement activities,
• In some of these funding cases, we had those types of allocations that nevertheless the agency said,
• So the state of New Mexico, as a named plaintiff in that case, would be subject to that specific order
• And for better or worse, the way case law courts have ruled.