Transcript Highlights:

• warrant to go on to premises that were posted or secured.
• We heard from law enforcement and they testified, I think, to a person that they already get search warrants
• And it's not difficult to get a warrant.
• the</c><00:40:43.040><c> same</c> get search warrants, but at the same get search warrants, but at the
• </c> And it's not difficult to get a warrant. And it's not difficult to get a warrant.

Committee: House Criminal Justice and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• warrants.
• And lastly, one of my concerns here is the warrant requirement for private LPRs.
• And lastly, one of my concerns here is the warrant requirement for private LPRs.
• For one, the major loophole in this bill is a lack of a warrant requirement.
• The major loophole in this bill is a lack of a warrant requirement.

Bills: HB2161 , HB2332 , HB2102

Committee: House Civil Rights & Judiciary

Keywords: attorney general, legal authority, state powers, judiciary, civil rights, driver privacy, data protection, personal information, surveillance, consumer rights, legal obligations, financial responsibility, debt management, consumer protection, court systems

Transcript Highlights:

• Warrants are fundamental. Warrants are mentioned in the constitution.
• c> in</c><02:14:20.880><c> this</c> warrants, a warrant requirement in this warrants, a warrant requirement
• </c><02:14:27.119><c> Warrants</c><02:14:27.599><c> are</c> Warrants are fundamental.
• Warrants are Warrants are fundamental.
• It's got a warrant requirement. signed. It's got a warrant requirement.

Transcript Highlights:

• There should be a warrant requirement that forces government officials to get a warrant before accessing
• If it were, you'd have to get a warrant to do that sort of thing.
• If it were, you'd have to get a warrant to do that sort of thing.
• If it were, you'd have to get a warrant to do that sort of thing.
• So that would be defined as any search to further a legitimate criminal investigation.

Bills: SB1072 , SB1111 , SB1114 , SB1116 , SB1122 , SB1179 , SB1250 , SB1308 , SB1455 , SB1456 , SB1457 , SB1487 , SB1547 , SB1549 , SB1551 , SB1552

Committee: Senate Appropriations, Transportation and Technology

Keywords: reimbursement rates, intellectual disabilities, community services, economic security, funding appropriations, automated license plate readers, law enforcement, privacy, data access, public records, behavioral health, patient brokering, appropriation, state funds, Maricopa County, claims review, medical necessity, American Indian health program, healthcare regulations, healthcare

Transcript Highlights:

• Or can their locker be searched and materials removed from it at any time?
• Or can their locker be searched and materials removed from it at any time?
• This bill does not prevent a search when cause exists.
• It simply requires notice or a warrant, so searches aren't conducted without our knowledge.
• You know, protections for locker searches.

Committee: House Local Government, Elections and Pensions

Summary: The Committee on Local Government first met in executive session and voted House Bill 2096 do pass by a roll call vote of 14 ayes and 0 noes. The committee then opened a public hearing on House Bill 1733, the Missouri Firefighter Bill of Rights, sponsored by Representative Wellencamp. The sponsor said the bill was intended to create statewide due-process protections for firefighters, paramedics, EMTs, and dispatchers employed by public agencies, including rules for investigations, interrogations, locker searches, discipline, and political activity. He said the bill was meant to address inconsistent procedures across departments and to protect workers from unfair treatment, while not limiting legitimate management investigations. Committee members questioned several parts of the bill, especially the scope of the immunity language, whether volunteer firefighters and fire districts were covered, and whether the bill would interfere with existing collective bargaining agreements or management’s ability to investigate misconduct. Supporters, including representatives from firefighter organizations, argued that the bill would provide needed statewide standards, clarify Garrity rights, protect political participation, and ensure fair disciplinary procedures. They said many departments lack consistent protections and that some firefighters have faced unfair investigations or terminations. Opponents, including representatives of fire protection districts, ambulance associations, and municipal risk-management groups, argued the bill was too broad, redundant, and likely to create litigation. They said many of the protections already exist through contracts, policies, or other laws, and raised concerns about the criminal immunity language, locker-search restrictions, and possible interference with EMS “hot wash” reviews and patient-care improvements. Several opponents also objected that the bill would impose a one-size-fits-all statewide mandate and could affect local control. The hearing closed without further action on House Bill 1733, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• But you didn't have consent, didn't have a warrant. What happens?
• We utilize him on search warrants.
• He's also a comfort to family and victims during these search warrants.
• Since March of last year, we have been deployed on just under 40 search warrants, and on about 20 of
• "On just under 40 search warrants, and on about 20 of those search warrants, he's located devices that

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Rules

Transcript Highlights:

• that warrants be issued only upon probable cause.
• that warrants be issued only upon probable cause.
• We're going to come up with a plan, and that plan is usually to write a search warrant.
• We still have to have a search warrant to kick in that door and go check on the kids, which we're not
• warrant.

Committee: House Health and Welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• is for judicial warrants when investigations are being done.
• to searches.
• This is not a search, right? No AG is going into your house to see if there's evidence of a crime.
• A warrant.
• We also ask to uphold the guidance at the felony warrant standard.

Bills: SB6011

Committee: House Civil Rights & Judiciary

Keywords: court security, bailiffs, threat assessment, judicial safety, law enforcement

Transcript Highlights:

• We want that to stay with law enforcement, to enter with search warrants, and then, if there's an issue
• In the rural areas, we don't want someone coming onto the property without a search warrant or probable
• They do not have the legal authority to come onto your property without a search warrant.
• If not, they have to come back with a search warrant.
• warrant or law enforcement.

Committee: House Special Committee on Urban Issues

Transcript Highlights:

• We don't let police search homes without a warrant just because the crime is serious.
• It's not onerous to get a warrant.
• We don't let police search homes without a warrant just because the crime is serious.
• warrant.
• Search warrants require probable cause, which must be based on specific, articulable facts that suggest

Bills: AB275 , SB371 , SB457

Committee: Assembly Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• We've run search warrants and been very successful. As Mr.
• So these are free-world individuals that we have run search warrants on.
• warrant, has to be executed within three days, to be the 15 days like the DNA search warrants, that
• Unfortunately, when we served the search warrant, all we had was AI porn.
• They've done a fairly good job in teaching us how to write a good search warrant, how to use the information

Committee: Senate Criminal Justice

Transcript Highlights:

• It says that the measure deletes procedures related to cost arrest warrants and the cost compliance program
• This is A heavy and weighty situation, and it should warrant these conversations.

Bills: HB2268 , HB3000 , HB3043 , HB3066 , HB3078 , HB3143 , HB3144 , HB3244 , HB3298 , HB3320 , HB3467 , HB3321 , HB3329 , HB3431 , HB3464 , HB3499 , HB3500 , HB3586 , HB3590 , HB3650 , HB3671 , HB3695 , HB3700 , HB3701 , HB3764 , HB3767 , HB3834 , HB3931 , HB3934 , HB3940 , HB3944 , HB3979 , HB3985 , HB4113 , HB4294 , HB4302 , HB4317 , HB4324 , HB4359 , HB4426 , HB4427 , HB4430 , HB4431 , HB4434 , HJR1077 , SR42 , SR35 , HJR1023 , HB1225 , HB1374 , HB1381 , HB1590 , HB1675 , HB2153

Keywords: HB2268, Oklahoma Health Care Authority, OHCA, appropriation, General Revenue Fund, PACE, Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly, elderly care, aging Oklahomans, long-term care, Medicaid, health care funding, provider reimbursement, rate increase, low-income seniors, senior services, integrated care, emergency measure, cosmetology, barbering

Bills: HB2268 , HB3000 , HB3043 , HB3066 , HB3078 , HB3143 , HB3144 , HB3244 , HB3298 , HB3320 , HB3467 , HB3321 , HB3329 , HB3431 , HB3464 , HB3499 , HB3500 , HB3586 , HB3590 , HB3650 , HB3671 , HB3695 , HB3700 , HB3701 , HB3764 , HB3767 , HB3834 , HB3931 , HB3934 , HB3940 , HB3944 , HB3979 , HB3985 , HB4113 , HB4294 , HB4302 , HB4317 , HB4324 , HB4359 , HB4426 , HB4427 , HB4430 , HB4431 , HB4434 , HJR1077 , SR42 , SR35 , HJR1023 , HB1225 , HB1374 , HB1381 , HB1590 , HB1675 , HB2153

Keywords: HB2268, Oklahoma Health Care Authority, OHCA, appropriation, General Revenue Fund, PACE, Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly, elderly care, aging Oklahomans, long-term care, Medicaid, health care funding, provider reimbursement, rate increase, low-income seniors, senior services, integrated care, emergency measure, cosmetology, barbering

Transcript Highlights:

• To the point, if a judge forgets to sign a search warrant, is it still a legal search warrant?
• I mean, should that technicality get rid of a search warrant and drug evidence?
• To the point, if a judge forgets to sign a search warrant, is it still a legal search warrant?
• I mean, should that technicality get rid of a search warrant and drug evidence?
• Or do you want search warrants without signatures to be okay? Mr. Chair, Senator Kavanaugh, Mr.

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from March 10, 2026, and then heard several House bills, mostly on appropriations, fees, water, food assistance, technology, and licensing. HB 2056, which would appropriate $100,000 for an Arizona Department of Water Resources feasibility study on brackish groundwater desalination, passed 6-3 despite concerns raised in opposition about increased groundwater pumping, subsidence, and impacts to tribal lands and conservation efforts. HB 2057, reducing the Arizona Centennial Special Plate renewal fee from $25 to $20, also passed 7-2 after one senator objected that the plate’s purpose and discount were not well justified. HB 2224, appropriating $1 million annually to DES for the produce incentive program, drew supportive testimony from food access groups who said the program helps families, farmers, and local markets; members noted the amount was below the prior $2 million funding level and could force site closures, but the bill passed 9-0. The committee also advanced HB 2257, which changes the distribution of watercraft registration and fee revenue, shifting more money to lake improvement and boating safety funds and less to the watercraft licensing fund. It passed 6-3 amid criticism that the bill moved money away from Game and Fish and concern that the boating safety fund increase could support immigration enforcement. HB 2265, which bars courts from charging criminal defendants for public defender services and certain other criminal-case fees and assessments, passed 7-1 after extensive testimony from advocates who argued the fees burden indigent defendants and cost more to collect than they raise; opponents called it a cost shift to counties and other local governments and said more fiscal data was needed. HB 2311, regulating publicly available conversational AI services with disclosure, anti-gamification, sexual-content restrictions, parental tools, and self-harm protocols, passed 7-2 after the sponsor and supporters framed it as child protection, while opponents warned about privacy, surveillance, and overbroad definitions; an Epstein amendment broadening the bill was rejected. The committee then considered HB 2752, which would subject Arizona Commerce Authority trade offices to legislative appropriation and require annual reporting. The ACA said it was neutral but supported the concept of data-driven decisions; the sponsor said the Legislature should approve trade offices and that the bill reflected his prior trade-office initiatives. An Epstein amendment requiring objective research for trade-office appropriations was rejected, and the bill passed 6-3. Finally, the committee heard HB 2957, which would preserve non-Real ID driver’s licenses, prohibit mandatory participation in enhanced ID programs, restrict biometric collection and document retention, and bar government entities from requiring digital or mobile IDs. The sponsor and several supporters argued it protects privacy, state sovereignty, and informed consent, while opponents from ADOT and the trucking industry warned it could conflict with federal Real ID and CDL requirements and jeopardize federal compliance and funding. The discussion was still ongoing at the end of the transcript, with witnesses and members debating whether the bill would change current practice or create federal conflicts.

Transcript Highlights:

• law if it's a search warrant issued by a state court judge. >> Representative Rarick: Thank you, Mr.
• current Fourth Amendment law. fedally issued search warrant and state fedally issued search warrant
• > a</c> law if it's a search warrant issued by a law if it's a search warrant issued by a state<01:00
• :51.680><c> search</c><01:01:52.000><c> warrant,</c><01:01:52.720><c> um</c> judicially issued search
• warrant, um judicially issued search warrant, um they<01:01:53.119><c> could</c><01:01:53.280><c> not

Bills: HF3432 , HF3411

Committee: House Higher Education Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay. because you got a search warrant? Yes, ma'am.
• And I had a district judge ready to give me an arrest warrant if I didn't get it. OK.
• I search warrant on a Scrivner error, which is laughable.
• warrant in the HR department, and the HR department manager tried to tell me that my search warrant
• wasn't valid, and I've been running search warrants for 30 years.

Bills: SB604 , SB843 , SB1636 , SB2395 , SB571 , SB1224 , SB1832 , SB2392 , SB747 , SB2623 , SB2624 , SB2185

Committees: Senate Education , Senate Education K-16

Transcript Highlights:

• ICE's arrests are based on warrants. It's important to know the reality.
• These warrants are not issued by a judge. ICE officers issued these warrants to themselves.
• Make no mistake, ICE warrants are today's general warrants. Thank you. Make no mistake.
• ICE warrants are today's general warrants.
• So he searched me out from one of my neighbors, Raquel DePina, who worked with...

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on the Judiciary

Summary: The Joint Committee on the Judiciary held a late-file hearing on several bills, with Chairs Michael Day and Lydia Edwards outlining hearing rules, testimony limits, and written-testimony procedures. The first bill discussed was H. 4876, a proposal to strengthen supports for survivors of abuse. Representative Carol Faiola testified on behalf of a constituent who described how a lifetime restraining order was effectively undermined after a family member’s death, arguing the bill should limit abusers’ legal standing after death, improve survivor notification and privacy protections, expand coercive-control definitions, and create education and resource programs. The committee then heard testimony on H. 5111, which would strengthen the Massachusetts Antitrust Act. Representative Dave Rogers and Attorney General’s Office antitrust chief Anthony Mariano said the bill would give the state more tools to pursue anti-competitive conduct, including conduct with multi-state effects, while allowing enforcement even when federal authorities are also involved. They said it would increase penalties, clarify that invitations to conspire are violations, protect labor markets, remove limits affecting some housing transactions, and extend the statute of limitations. The committee also heard support for a related “universal 1983” bill, S. 2976/H. 2976, creating a state cause of action for constitutional violations by federal, state, or local officers acting under color of law; supporters said it would fill gaps in remedies against federal officers while preserving qualified immunity. Testimony also supported H. 4783, a bill affirming the rights of people experiencing homelessness. The Massachusetts Coalition for the Homeless said the measure would push back against growing criminalization of homelessness, especially after the Supreme Court’s Grants Pass decision and local encampment bans, and would protect the use of public spaces without discrimination based on housing status. On H. 4826, condo owners and advocates said Chapter 183A is outdated and leaves owners with too little say and too few remedies against mismanagement, citing problems such as unsafe water, major assessments, and lack of meaningful dispute resolution. The committee also heard strong support for H. 5116, renaming the Dorchester Division of the Boston Municipal Court the Judge Leslie E. Harris Courthouse, with testimony from family members, legislators, attorneys, and community leaders describing Judge Harris’s mentorship, community service, and commitment to second chances. Later testimony covered S. 2975, a bill to deter ICE courthouse arrests and protect access to justice; CPCS, law students, and defense advocates said courthouse arrests chill participation by defendants, witnesses, and victims and disrupt pending cases. The committee also heard support for H. 5244, repealing an archaic law criminalizing concealment of a child’s death, with advocates arguing it has been used to punish pregnancy loss and should be removed. The hearing concluded with additional testimony in favor of S. 2976 and more support for the Judge Harris courthouse renaming, after which the chairs closed the hearing and reminded the public how to submit written testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• ICE's arrests are based on warrants. It's important to know the reality.
• These warrants are not issued by a judge. ICE officers issued these warrants to themselves.
• Make no mistake, ICE warrants are today's general warrants. Thank you.
• Make no mistake, ICE warrants are today's general warrants.
• So he searched me out from one of my neighbors, Raquel DePina, who worked with...

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on the Judiciary

Summary: The Joint Committee on the Judiciary held a late-file hearing on several bills, with testimony limited to three minutes per individual or set time limits for panels. Chairs Michael Day and Lydia Edwards outlined hearing rules, written testimony procedures, and confidentiality protections before moving through the agenda. The committee heard testimony on bills including H.4876, H.5111, H.4783, H.4826, H.5116, H.5244, S.2975, and S.2976. On H.4876, supporters described it as the “Overcomers Law,” aimed at strengthening supports for survivors of abuse by limiting abusers’ legal standing after death, requiring survivor notification of an abuser’s death, expanding coercive control definitions, improving privacy protections, and creating education and resource programs. On H.5111, the Attorney General’s Office and legislative sponsors backed changes to strengthen Massachusetts antitrust enforcement, including broader jurisdiction over multi-state conduct, higher penalties, clearer treatment of invitations to conspire, labor-market protections, housing-related changes, and a longer statute of limitations. The committee also heard support for H.4783, which would reaffirm the rights of people experiencing homelessness and push back against criminalization of homelessness, and for H.4826, which would update condominium law to give owners more rights and nonjudicial dispute-resolution options. A large portion of the hearing focused on H.5116, which would rename the Dorchester Division of the Boston Municipal Court the Judge Leslie E. Harris Courthouse. Representative Worrell, the Harris family, senators, prosecutors, lawyers, educators, and community advocates testified in strong support, describing Judge Harris’s legacy of fairness, mentorship, community service, and support for young people and Black legal professionals. The committee also heard testimony on S.2975, which would prohibit civil immigration arrests in courthouses to protect access to justice, and S.2976, which would create a state cause of action for constitutional violations by federal officers. Finally, H.5244 was supported as a repeal of an archaic criminal statute that advocates said has been used to punish pregnancy loss and should be removed from the books. No votes were taken; the hearing concluded after all registered testimony was heard.

Transcript Highlights:

• We want that to stay with law enforcement to enter with search warrants.
• In the rural areas, we don't want someone coming onto the property without a search warrant or probable
• They do not have the legal authority to come onto your property without a search warrant.
• If not, they have to come back with a search warrant.
• warrant or law enforcement.

Committee: House Special Committee on Urban Issues

Summary: The Special Committee on Urban Issues held a public hearing on House Bill 2292, sponsored by Rep. Holly Jones, which would require cross-reporting and training between child/elder abuse systems and animal welfare personnel. Jones said the bill is intended to help identify abuse earlier by training investigators to recognize signs of abuse in both people and companion animals, and she announced planned amendments to narrow the definition of animal to dogs, cats, rabbits, and birds and to extend training time from one hour to one and a half hours. She emphasized the bill is focused on companion animals, not livestock, and said it would use existing agencies rather than create a new department. The committee heard questions about the definition of companion animal and the scope of the bill. Supporters included Humane World for Animals, the Jackson County Prosecutor’s Office, the Missouri Alliance for Animal Legislation, the Missouri Animal Control Association, the Animal Legal Defense Fund, Wayside Waifs, and the St. Louis County Police Association. They argued that animal abuse is closely linked to child, elder, and domestic abuse, that animal control officers and humane investigators often see warning signs first, and that cross-reporting would improve early intervention and save lives. Several witnesses described cases where animal abuse coincided with child abuse or other violence, and some said current reporting systems are inconsistent or delayed. One witness also said the training could be provided at low cost through existing mechanisms. Opponents, including the Missouri Pet Breeders Association, Missouri Cattleman’s Association, Missouri Federation of Animal Owners, and Missouri Animal Husbandry Association, raised concerns about the bill’s wording, possible inclusion of commercial breeders or livestock-related issues, and the role of humane investigators. They argued that animal abuse is already reported to law enforcement, that the bill could create confusion about authority or access to private property, and that it could impose costs and training burdens on agencies already stretched thin. Some rural witnesses said they wanted any investigations to remain with law enforcement and the Department of Agriculture, not animal welfare groups. The hearing ended without a vote or other action on the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• warrants when investigations are being done.
• This is an administrative warrant of a sort. Why is it appropriate here, but not in other contexts?
• to searches.
• This is not a search, right? No AG is going into your house to see if there's evidence of a crime.
• We also ask to uphold the guidance at the felony warrant standard.

Summary: The committee heard several bills, with the most extensive discussion focused on civil investigative demands for the Attorney General (ESSB 5925), automated license plate readers (ESSB 6002/6702), medical debt interest limits (ESSB 5993), default judgments in consumer debt cases (SSB 5720), adult guardianship technical changes (ESSB 5837), and Court of Appeals bailiff authority (SB 6011). Sponsors and agency staff generally framed the bills as targeted tools or clarifications, while opponents raised concerns about privacy, due process, overreach, and unintended consequences. The AG’s office supported 5925 as a way to investigate civil rights, wage theft, and related laws more efficiently; opponents argued it gave too much pre-suit power and lacked sufficient judicial safeguards. The Court of Appeals bailiff bill was presented as a near-identical extension of authority already given to Supreme Court bailiffs, with no major controversy beyond questions about training. The ALPR bill drew the sharpest policy split. Supporters, including the prime sponsor and civil rights advocates, argued Washington lacks meaningful regulation of license plate readers and needs limits on retention, sharing, and vendor access to protect privacy and prevent misuse. Law enforcement, cities, and some parking-related users said the bill was necessary but too restrictive or technically flawed, warning it could effectively shut down the technology or prevent use in serious cases; they asked for broader crime coverage, clearer definitions, and longer retention. Privacy and civil liberties groups supported regulation but urged stronger protections, especially shorter retention periods and tighter limits on third-party access. On medical debt, the sponsor and supporters argued that capping interest at 1% would reduce financial harm to patients, especially those facing serious illness, and would still allow administrative costs to be covered. They cited bankruptcy risk, chronic illness, and the burden on families, while noting the bill was narrowed from an earlier version and made prospective. Hospitals, collectors, dentists, and physician groups opposed the bill, saying it would not solve broader affordability problems, could reduce repayment incentives, and might push providers toward cash-only models or credit cards, especially harming small and rural practices. The committee also heard support for the consumer debt default judgment bill as a negotiated compromise that improves notice and preserves existing debt-buyer protections, and for the guardianship bill as a technical cleanup of adult guardianship and supported decision-making provisions. No votes or final actions were taken in the hearing excerpts provided.