Transcript Highlights:

• And, and so in that case we we strongly support this bill.
• So would that be the case in, in this particular situation?
• What are, what are their options in the case that, um.
• If you wanna be a party in this case, check this box.
• establish a 20% rate increase cap in those same types of cases.

Bills: HB 29, HB 685, HB 1633, HB 1689, HB 1690, HB 1918, HB 2010, HB 2500, HB 2608, HB 2626

Keywords: water audit, water loss, water loss mitigation plan, municipally owned utility, municipal utility, water conservation, Texas Water Development Board, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, water leakage, leak detection, billing data accuracy, utility validation, water audit validation, water scarcity, water management, infrastructure, public utility, conservation plan, administrative penalty

Transcript Highlights:

• These are big seminal cases. So there's every expectation that Calais will be a seminal case, too.
• Calais will be a seminal case, too.
• So, Senator, you've got the Black Voters Matter case and you've got the Calais case.
• But the Fair Districts Amendment's case, the Black Voters Matter case, the logical import of that decision
• It has to be included in districts somewhere, and in this particular case, and in many cases, including

Summary: The Committee on Rules met with a quorum present and took up a presentation from the Governor’s office on proposed congressional reapportionment. Executive Office of the Governor counsel Mo Jazeel argued that mid-cycle congressional redistricting is legally permissible, that race should not be used in drawing districts, and that the Florida Fair Districts provisions are inconsistent with federal equal protection principles and, in the executive branch’s view, are inseverable. Jason Parada then presented the proposed map, explaining that it was drawn using 2020 census block data, with county growth estimates used only as a guide, and that the plan was designed to be race-neutral while also considering compactness, county and municipal boundaries, and other traditional redistricting criteria. He said the map keeps 48 counties and 382 municipalities whole, has compactness scores comparable to the current map, and makes the largest changes in South Florida, with some districts remaining unchanged and others reconfigured around population shifts and geographic boundaries. Members questioned both presenters extensively about the legal basis for disregarding the Fair Districts Amendment, the use of partisan data, the absence of racial analysis, and whether the map truly reflects population growth. Jazeel said the executive branch’s position is that race-based provisions in the state constitution cannot be used if they conflict with the U.S. Constitution, and that the forthcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision in Louisiana v. Calais could further clarify the law. Parada said he did not use race in drawing the map, did use partisan information as one of several traditional criteria, and relied on 2020 census data for population equality. Senators also pressed him on who reviewed the map, why the public and legislators had limited time to review it, and whether the plan was intended to favor Republicans; Parada denied partisan intent and said he was the only person who moved lines on the map, though he consulted with other Executive Office of the Governor staff and counsel. Several senators raised concerns that the map did not clearly reflect Florida’s recent population growth, that some districts remained highly irregular, and that the plan appeared to be based on a legal theory contingent on future court rulings. The presenters responded that congressional districts must be equal to the person, that growth estimates can only guide orientation rather than replace census data, and that the map was designed to preserve as much of the existing structure as possible while making the largest adjustments in South Florida. No vote or final action on the map was taken during the excerpted portion of the meeting, and the committee continued with questions and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• These are big seminal cases. So there's every expectation that Callais will be a seminal case, too.
• Callais will be a seminal case, too.
• So, Senator, you've got the Black Voters Matter case and you've got the Calais case.
• There's no case saying that you can't.
• It has to be included in districts somewhere, and in this particular case, and in many cases, including

Summary: The Committee on Rules met with a quorum and heard a Governor’s Office presentation on a proposed congressional reapportionment map. The governor’s counsel argued that mid-cycle congressional redistricting is legally permissible, that race should not be considered at all in drawing districts, and that the Florida Fair Districts provisions are inconsistent with federal equal protection law and should be treated as non-severable. The presentation also discussed the pending U.S. Supreme Court case Louisiana v. Callais and the Florida Supreme Court’s Black Voters Matter decision as part of the legal rationale for the map. Jason Parada, who said he drew the map alone, described the map as based on 2020 census block data, with county-level population estimates used only as a guide to identify faster-growing areas. He said the plan keeps 48 counties and 382 municipalities whole, has compactness scores similar to the current benchmark map, and uses traditional geographic and political boundaries such as roads, railways, county lines, and municipal lines. He walked through regional changes, emphasizing a race-neutral redesign that significantly altered South Florida, including changes to districts in Palm Beach, Broward, Miami-Dade, and the Everglades, while leaving several northern districts largely unchanged. Members questioned the witnesses extensively about the legal theory, the use of partisan data, the role of race, population growth, and the timing and review of the map. The witnesses said partisan data was considered along with other traditional redistricting criteria, but race was not used. They also said they could not speak to who else reviewed the map beyond EOG staff and counsel. Several senators raised concerns about the map’s compactness, county and city splits, the apparent partisan effects, and the fact that the map was released shortly before the special session. No vote or final action on the map was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• that can come up in another case.
• These are just some of the cases.
• Jackson case. Overturning Roe v.
• Foster case, which was a Fifth Circuit case from about 20 years ago in a neighboring state.
• There exists a case from Galveston where someone used the.

Bills: SB10, SB16, SB6, SB 6, SB 10, SB 16

Keywords: trafficking, prostitution, affirmative defense, victims, criminal justice reform, victim rights, criminal justice, judicial reform, court procedures, mental health services, criminal penalties, court security, SB 6, Woman and Child Protection Act, abortion, abortion-inducing drugs, medication abortion, mifepristone, misoprostol, pro-life

Transcript Highlights:

• One mental health case management and choice for independent case management.
• One mental health case management and choice for independent case management.
• One mental health case management and choice for independent case management.
• One mental health case management and choice for independent case management.
• Case management is defined similarly to behavioral health case management.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We now have a case worker who is going to help us with investigation of some of these cases.
• We review cases. Cases only come for review about two years after they occur because of...
• We had 1,222 cases, maternal mortality. In 2021, we had 1,222 cases of maternal mortality.
• We had 1222 cases, maternal mortality. 21, we had 1222 cases, maternal mortality.
• cases.

Summary: The committee first approved the previous meeting minutes and then heard a detailed annual report from Dr. Thomas Arnold, chair of the Maternal Mortality Review Committee, on maternal mortality trends and policy issues. He explained the committee’s review process, confidentiality protections, and national and North Dakota data showing that most maternal deaths are preventable and that mental health conditions, substance use, cardiovascular issues, infection, hemorrhage, and embolism are the leading causes. Members asked about suicide, domestic violence, midwife training, home births, and whether pregnancy testing at death scenes should be expanded; Dr. Arnold said better coroner education, more investigation of unexplained deaths, and possible post-mortem pregnancy testing could improve case identification, especially in rural areas. He also noted that deaths often occur well after 42 days postpartum and that mental health-related deaths remain a major concern. The committee then heard from State Fire Marshal Dr. Matthew Clark on cigarette reduced-ignition-propensity standards and related fire prevention issues. He recommended updating the state’s cigarette propensity law to current national standards and also raised a separate recommendation to require fast-breakaway oxygen tubing for home oxygen users, citing fatal fires linked to smoking around oxygen. Members asked about implementation, cost, insurance coverage, and whether the standards apply in tribal communities; Dr. Clark said he would provide follow-up information and was willing to help with any legislation, but no agency bill had yet been planned. Next, Christine Greff of the Department of Health and Human Services reported on the North Dakota Stroke System of Care. She described the statewide network of stroke-ready hospitals, registry-based quality improvement, and performance data showing continued improvement in stroke recognition, imaging, thrombolytic treatment, transfers, and EMS pre-notification. She highlighted new quality measures for inter-facility transfers and intracerebral hemorrhage care, and said the system remains strong but depends on continued legislative and hospital support. Committee members asked about participation by the VA hospital and were encouraged to consider outreach to include it more fully in the stroke system. Finally, the committee began a presentation on prior authorization and non-opioid pain treatment from Taha Khan of Vertex Pharmaceuticals. He argued that prior authorization can delay access to non-opioid acute pain medications, especially in the 24- to 72-hour post-discharge window when pain is most severe, and said delays can push patients toward opioids. He emphasized that prior authorization has a role in utilization management but should not create barriers in acute pain care, and he noted that current use of the company’s non-opioid product remains very low. The discussion was still underway when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• In this<00:26:48.200> case,<00:26:48.600> it's<00:26:49.120> uh this case, it's
• I know to prove the business case.
• to do it for all and I don't see a case to do it for all and I don't see a case for<01:07:33.720
• business case. business case. Mr.<01:07:54.720> Chair Mr. Chair Mr.
• My name [clears throat] is Adam Case. My name [clears throat] is Adam Case.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 1,44 pending cases as of August 2025. 1,44 pending cases as of August 2025.
• And when we say until your case is over.
• The motion to get the case dismissed.
• lot of cases. lot of cases.
• pending criminal case in state court. pending criminal case in state court.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Public Safety held an informational briefing on findings from the deportation data project and possible policy responses to increased federal immigration enforcement in Hawaii. In opening remarks, the chair said the committee was concerned about changing federal executive orders, policies, and enforcement actions, and framed the issue as one involving due process and public safety. The chair and presenters described reports of ICE activity on multiple islands, including raids, courthouse presence, and fear in immigrant communities, and said the committee was considering whether state policies should be advanced more quickly. Mandy Fernandez of the ACLU of Hawaii presented updated deportation data and argued that increased immigration enforcement is creating fear, reducing crime reporting, and potentially making state and local agencies extensions of the federal immigration agenda if they accept federal funding with conditions. She said the deportation data project, housed at UC Berkeley Law with UCLA’s Center for Immigration Law and Policy, uses FOIA requests and its latest data runs through late July 2025. She reported 153 ICE arrests in Hawaii from January through July 2025, up from 41 in the same period in 2024; 96 removals, up from 15; a federal detention center average daily population of 91 in June 2025 versus 31 in June 2024; and 111 ICE detainers issued in Hawaii from September 2023 through July 2025, with 49 issued in 2025. She also cited an immigration court backlog of 1,144 pending cases as of August 2025 and noted that about one in five Hawaii residents were born outside the United States. Haley Chang of the Office of the Public Defender said her office is seeing a marked increase in ICE presence around courthouses and more ICE contacts with clients, including reports of people being detained after court appearances or while on supervision. She emphasized that the office is not an immigration law office and that much of its information is anecdotal, but said the pattern appears new compared with prior years. In response to committee questions, she explained that ICE detainers are requests, not judicial warrants, and said local law enforcement is generally not required to honor them unless accompanied by a judicial warrant or other legal authority. She also said the public defender’s office had not yet seen new criminal charges arise solely from an ICE detention or failure to appear tied to immigration enforcement, though cases could be affected if defendants are removed from the criminal process.

Transcript Highlights:

• you know, 95 cases open. you know, 95 cases open.
• cases open, and some case of of the new cases open, and some were<01:08:05.400> from<01:08:05.600
• after case after case.
• And so that's the public just unbelievable case after case after just unbelievable case after case after
• So, US attorney cases, not county cases.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• A lot of times one case leads into another case.
• times one case leads into another case. times one case leads into another case.
• Senator Case, could Mr.
• Hopefully that's the case, but maybe it's not always the case. But, um, Mr.
• not always the case. But um Mr. not always the case. But um Mr.

Bills: HB0130, HB0147

Keywords: Second Amendment, firearms, state rights, federal regulation, law enforcement, civil penalties, government liability, property tax, homeowner exemption, Wyoming, voter initiative, tax legislation, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and adding automation like case noting. and adding automation like case noting.
• Having to do this type of manual update for their cases adds extra time onto each case they process and
• > extra onto each case they process and extra onto each case they process and extra keystrokes
• cases and we call those happy paths. cases and we call those happy paths.
• So, if you've got a different case.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So I have a lot of cases that are both misdemeanor and felony.
• So you're looking in most cases, if somebody...
• People whose cases have been dismissed.
• You understand those only happen in misdemeanor cases.
• Just a heads up in case anybody's waiting for those today.

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I know that's the Republican theory of the case.
• And indeed, in every case that I'm aware of in which those cases were allowed to go to judgment, the
• white-collar case outside of Madoff for years.
• But in this case, if you are affiliated with any kind of case that Mr.
• these cases were also deeply legitimate cases. people who violently attacked this building, including

Bills: SB331

Keywords: fentanyl, controlled substances, drug trafficking, public health, research regulations, law enforcement, Kash Patel, FBI director nomination, S331, Fentanyl Act, committee meeting, legislative discussion

Summary: In this committee meeting, the primary focus was on the nomination of Kash Patel for the position of director of the FBI, which had sparked considerable debate over the past week. Members discussed the extensive vetting process Patel underwent, including a lengthy hearing where he addressed numerous questions, which emphasized his qualifications and the support he received from various law enforcement organizations. The meeting included significant arguments from both sides, reflecting the polarized nature of the nomination, especially regarding the allegations made against Patel by some committee members. As discussions continued, the committee decided to hold off on the Fentanyl Act, listed as S331, until the next meeting, indicating a prioritization of the nomination vote over new legislative measures at this time.

Transcript Highlights:

• Or would this be a case-by-case issue where, if something heinous like this were to occur, it gives the
• So the family court wouldn’t necessarily assume all of these cases.
• So you’re looking at a case-by-case basis? Okay.
• That makes it a little bit more palatable when it’s case-by-case, and it’s the command that’s making
• So, it’s case-by-case, command decision. So there is no standard. It’s a commander’s decision.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Veterans and Federal Affairs held its first public hearing of the 2025–2026 session, with House Chair Rep. Joe McGonagle outlining the committee’s focus on veterans’ benefits, military families, and related policy priorities. He noted the committee’s recent record of advancing major veterans legislation, described the hearing as hybrid, and explained that testimony would be limited to three minutes. The committee then heard testimony on several bills, including H. 3886/S. 2503, H. 3863/S. 2480, and H. 3859, among others. Melissa Willett of the Department of Defense and Rep. John Stanley testified in support of H. 3886/S. 2503, which would expand support for military families by improving school open enrollment flexibility, special education continuity, concurrent jurisdiction for juvenile matters on military installations, and coordination around military protective orders. Committee members questioned the juvenile jurisdiction and protective-order provisions, with concerns raised about federal versus state authority and due process; witnesses said the jurisdiction change would be case-by-case and that military protective orders are commander-issued decisions that could be used as evidence in civilian proceedings. The Department of Defense said the proposal aligns with priorities from military stakeholders and other New England states. Jim Keene testified in support of H. 3863/S. 2480, seeking a cost-of-living adjustment for veterans’ benefits and extending certain benefits to Guard and Reserve members killed on active duty. Allie DeBateau of the Massachusetts Municipal Association testified on H. 3859, which would streamline veterans benefits administration by having the state pay benefits directly rather than reimbursing municipalities quarterly; she said this would reduce local administrative burden while leaving local veterans service officers’ roles unchanged. Committee members asked about municipal support and the fiscal impact, and the hearing concluded with no votes taken, followed by adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• The case law that's closest to... ...that's not shared with the legislature.
• Chairman, I'm wondering if the rules attorney has reviewed an Arizona Supreme Court case.
• We were reviewing the Johnson Utilities case, and then also there was another case called, I think it's
• I think it depends on how you read that case, too.
• I think it depends on how you read that case, too.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Rules Committee met to consider several bills for constitutional and proper-form review. House Bill 2171, which would bar certain hostile governments and associated persons from owning or possessing Arizona real property and create enforcement penalties, was found to raise possible conflict with federal foreign-relations law, but was still recommended as constitutional and in proper form by a 5-2 vote. House Bill 2446, dealing with English proficiency requirements for commercial truckers and out-of-service orders, was also recommended 5-2, with staff noting a needed floor amendment to carve out the federal border commercial zone to avoid Supremacy Clause concerns. House Bill 2331, which would require electric utilities to obtain 85% of electricity from “reliable” sources by 2030 and assign enforcement to the Corporation Commission, drew concerns about the Commission’s exclusive constitutional authority over utility regulation and rate-making, but was likewise recommended 5-2. The committee then considered House Bill 2589, which would make it a felony to allow minors to attend or view drag shows. Staff said the bill raised First Amendment and parental-rights concerns and could face strict scrutiny, and recommended an amendment to narrow it; the sponsor’s office was reportedly working on changes. Despite objections from members who called it overly broad and unconstitutional, the bill was recommended 5-2. House Bill 2592, concerning state agency use of artificial intelligence and legislative ratification of temporary rules, was flagged for legislative entrenchment issues because it attempted to bind future legislatures and set a simple-majority ratification requirement, but it too was recommended in proper form with a suggested amendment to remove the problematic mechanism. At the end of the meeting, the committee took up a large mass motion covering many additional bills, memorials, resolutions, and one concurrent memorial, all of which staff said were constitutional and in proper form. During that discussion, staff specifically noted House Bill 2976, relating to justice court administration, as needing amendment to avoid tension with the Arizona Supreme Court’s constitutional authority over court administration. The mass motion passed 7-0 with one member absent, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today, we are announcing criminal filings in four cases involving fraud.
• Included in this total number is 22 FTE, which is a small team, but dedicated to abuse cases and, as
• These cases involved individuals across multiple counties.
• I would note that one of these cases involves a county employee who abused their position of trust.
• We receive complaints in, and then we work with our partners to be able to build cases.

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: Oregon Attorney General staff held a press event on National Health Care Fraud Take Down Day to announce new Medicaid fraud enforcement actions and highlight the work of the state’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit. The attorney general said the unit, created in 1986, has secured 348 criminal convictions, 156 civil settlements and judgments, and significant recoveries since 2010, and noted the legislature recently approved additional staffing. She framed the work as protecting vulnerable Oregonians and taxpayer dollars, and said the unit is a small multidisciplinary team of investigators, auditors, attorneys, data analysts, and a nurse investigator. The office announced criminal filings in four cases involving alleged fraud by providers or public employees, including charges against a Beaverton man tied to housing assistance funds, a Corvallis provider and company accused of billing Medicaid for services not provided, a former Lane County employee accused of improper personal purchases on a government credit card, and a Tigard man in a medical transportation-related case. The attorney general also cited recent outcomes in other cases, including a Portland nurse who pleaded no contest and was sentenced to jail, probation, and restitution for billing for services not provided. She emphasized that the defendants are presumed innocent. In response to questions, the attorney general said Oregon staff attended a recent federal meeting on Medicaid fraud despite late notice to many Democratic states, describing the issue as bipartisan even amid broader disagreements with the Trump administration. She said federal staffing cuts have made state enforcement more important and that Oregon is already evaluating how to adapt to a more complex fraud landscape. She also said the cases announced are primarily against providers and entities rather than Medicaid recipients, and that Oregon’s managed care system is not currently a major barrier to investigations.

Transcript Highlights:

• So equity is really fleshed out a lot in the Dupree case, but also in the Lake View case.
• So now we're going to transition to case law.
• So the Dupree case.
• That was a big issue in the Lake View case in 2005.
• I mean, we don't have any case law on this.

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the prior minutes and then shifted to an update from Department of Education Secretary Jacob Oliva and Deputy Commissioner Stacey Smith on early childhood education, especially the state-funded Arkansas Better Chance (ABC) program. They said Arkansas had received a federal Preschool Development Grant and described ABC as a large state program with about 23,800 funded slots and roughly $114 million in annual appropriations. Department officials said they are reviewing slot allocations because about 1,000 seats are funded but unfilled, while more than 2,000 families are on waiting lists, and they plan to reduce or reallocate slots from providers that have not filled them over several years. They also said they are examining whether income thresholds, curriculum expectations, daily rates, and summer programming should be updated, and members raised concerns about access, local control, transportation, and whether the program should better align with K-12 choice and school readiness goals. The committee agreed to form an early childhood subcommittee and asked the Bureau of Legislative Research to help gather historical data and other information for future discussion. The committee then received a legal presentation from BLR attorney Taylor Lloyd on the constitutional and statutory framework for education adequacy in Arkansas. She reviewed the Dupree and Lake View cases, explaining that the state must maintain a general, suitable, and efficient system of free public schools, and that adequacy and equity are distinct but related concepts. She emphasized that the General Assembly is responsible for defining adequacy, studying whether the system meets that standard, and reacting to the evidence, while the courts ultimately decide constitutional compliance. Lloyd also explained the current adequacy definition, the role of the matrix as a funding tool rather than a spending mandate, and the distinction between unrestricted foundation funding and restricted categorical funding. BLR’s Elizabeth Bynum followed with a historical overview of how Arkansas responded to the court cases and developed the current adequacy process. She traced major legislative actions from the 1980s through the Lake View litigation, including the creation of funding formulas, categorical aid, isolated funding, declining enrollment funding, and the 2003-2004 adequacy study that led to the Continuing Adequacy Evaluation Act and the matrix used to set foundation funding. She also described later changes to the adequacy statute, the financial reporting requirements for districts, and the ongoing use of surveys, stakeholder testimony, and consultant studies in the biennial adequacy process. Members asked questions about whether private or homeschool programs could use public funds for expenses like utilities, whether stakeholders should include those groups, the difference between average daily membership and attendance, and whether school board members are surveyed; staff said those issues would need further research or were outside the scope of the presenters’ role.

Transcript Highlights:

• prisons and and these other edge cases prisons and and these other edge cases where<00:37:24.800
• Uh and in the case of the a firearm.
• particular actual case and controversy. particular actual case and controversy.
• In this case, if the house is posted, we obviously can't do that.
• So I'm reading as the whole case can get thrown out because of that.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• be an automatic 15 days in every case. be an automatic 15 days in every case.
• cases. Um and this does not change that. cases. Um and this does not change that.
• the case. the case.
• <03:00:17.359> case covered or is it is it a case-by case covered or is it is it a case-by
• make the case to go above the 3%. make the case to go above the 3%.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I will miss the types of cases I sit on.
• . cases. cases.
• Okay, so I think it's important to start out by saying you definitely need to take this on a case-by-case
• Um, there is the possibility, and again on a case-by-case basis, that the person potentially could be
• <00:26:46.799> to the prosecutor in each of the cases to the prosecutor in each of the cases

Bills: SB2418, SB2568, SB2661

Keywords: drug paraphernalia, overdose prevention, public health, substance use, harm reduction, criminal justice reform, public servants, harassment, safety, government, criminal offense, nepotism, transparency, public officials, accountability, government ethics, 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee first took up three previously heard measures in decision-making. SB 2418, which repeals the law prohibiting drug paraphernalia under the Uniform Controlled Substances Act, was amended to keep prohibitions on manufacturing-related paraphernalia and then passed. SB 2568, which elevates harassment against certain public officials to a misdemeanor, was amended to place it in the harassment statute, narrow the nexus language, and extend coverage to all public employees; it passed with amendments. SB 2661, dealing with nepotism rules in the code of ethics, was amended so the ethics restrictions would apply more broadly to legislators and judges as well, and it also passed with amendments. In each case, the committee reported no no-votes or reservations and adopted the measures. The committee then heard Governor’s Message 684, the nomination of Judge Stephanie Char to the Fifth Circuit Court on Kauai. The governor’s office testified in strong support, and the Hawaii State Bar Association representative said the usual review process found her qualified. Judge Char described her Kauai roots, 17 years as a public defender, and service as a district family court judge since December 2020, saying she would bring hard work and continued commitment to access to justice. Members questioned her about recusals on a small island, her experience handling criminal and civil matters, sentencing repeat offenders, administrative appeals, and how she would approach competency and fitness issues under HRS 704. Char said she had recused only a few times, emphasized case-by-case sentencing and probation conditions tailored to underlying problems, and said she would rely on preparation and education for unfamiliar administrative matters. On 704 cases, she said defendants awaiting evaluation should generally remain in custody, with possible diversion or strict release conditions in appropriate cases, and that those found unfit would need to be sent to Hawaii State Hospital. No vote was taken on the nomination; the committee announced it would decide on Monday, February 23, at 10:45 a.m. in Room 016.