Transcript Highlights:

• are things that we would discuss at the full committee, not at this last extension, and then the judicial
• The judicial branch deleted their... So now we'll go to the lapse extensions.
• It doesn't have to happen, but it is a request of the judicial branch, and they'd be willing to come
• I would suggest that you talk to the judicial branch and have them come in to explain.
• branch and have them come in to judicial branch and have them come in to explain<01:02:48.559> there

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee met to review the lapse extensions in the back of House Bill 25, which governs capital budget appropriations and bonding. Members were walked through how the bill is structured: section 1 covers general, federal, and other funds; section 2 covers highway fund appropriations; later sections authorize borrowing, restrict spending to the stated purposes, and explain why community colleges and the university system operate through their boards of trustees. The chair also explained that lapse extensions are needed because capital projects can span multiple years, and that appropriations normally expire at the end of the biennium unless extended. A substantial portion of the discussion focused on how to identify unspent balances and whether they should be extended, repurposed, or allowed to lapse. Members discussed that if a project is complete or an agency confirms it no longer needs the money, the remaining balance can be reused for another project or, if not needed, lapse back. The committee also reviewed the meaning of bill references and chapter numbers, and how to read prior-year appropriations and extensions in the worksheet. One example discussed was a 2023 Department of Administrative Services courthouse generators item, and members noted that some agencies may rely on encumbered balances rather than explicit lapse extensions, though the chair said he prefers including the extension for flexibility. The committee identified at least one specific change: the Jeffrey Ringe CTE renovation was removed from the governor’s recommended budget because the required local match was not approved, freeing about $18.5 million for possible reuse. Later, the chair noted that lapse extension 49 on the worksheet was no longer needed and could be removed, leaving an unspent balance of $81,500 available for repurposing. The discussion also referenced a Department of Transportation item, Caroline Stratford Freight Rail Improvements, which the agency asked to keep alive through a lapse extension so the funds would not expire on June 30. No formal votes were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• No, the part of the bill that, you know, it takes, it forces the hand of the judicial system.
• City marshals are already accountable through elections, budget oversight, judicial oversight, state
• district and Ann Lee Shealy with the 16th Judicial District Attorney's Office are all here in support
• And people had to make adjustments, you know, between the jailing and the prosecution side, the judicial
• side, and caseloads got... ...you know, between the jailing and the prosecution side, the judicial side

Summary: The committee first approved the April 28 minutes and announced that Senate Bill 499 was voluntarily deferred. It then heard several House bills, beginning with HB 168, a reentry/transitional housing program for female parolees near release; supporters said it would improve public safety and reduce recidivism, and the bill was reported favorably without objection. HB 322, a cleanup bill from the Maggie Grace Act clarifying that victims or families requesting transcripts would not be charged, was also reported favorably without objection. HB 622, which aligns Louisiana criminal history information practices with federal rules, was amended and then reported favorably. HB 821, moving the School for Safe Centers from GOSEP to the Louisiana Commission on Law Enforcement, was reported favorably as well. The committee then took up HB 364, which directs State Police to partner on public awareness efforts about the illegality of discharging firearms, especially around holidays. An amendment removed a proposed printing cost and shifted the bill toward PSAs; the bill was reported favorably with amendments. HB 568, which strengthens enforcement of drug-free school zone laws by creating a clearer offense for openly smoking or vaping illegal drugs in school zones and setting a specific penalty for marijuana, drew extensive debate. Supporters, including the author and governor’s office, said it was needed to protect children and families and to give law enforcement a workable deterrent. Opponents argued it would impose harsh, geography-based penalties, sweep in medical cannabis patients and veterans, and worsen racial and fiscal disparities. After roll-call, the committee reported HB 568 favorably by a 3-2 vote. The committee also approved HB 296, a cleanup bill removing long-defunct programs from statute, without objection. HB 823, creating an Orleans Parish DA pilot diversion program for unhoused people accused of nonviolent offenses, was supported by Covenant House and others as a way to avoid criminalizing homelessness and was reported favorably without objection. Finally, HB 1038, a major bill revising the authority and liability structure of city marshals and local governments, prompted extensive testimony. The bill and amendments would limit some marshal powers in smaller jurisdictions, require local approval for certain staffing/insurance matters, and allow local governments to restore powers by ordinance. Supporters said it would reduce liability, clarify authority, and address problems in some marshal offices; opponents, including multiple marshals and law enforcement supporters, said it would undermine elected marshals, hurt small offices, and was too broad and under-studied. The transcript ends amid that hearing, with no final committee action shown on HB 1038.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have to use it judiciously and uh we got to protect it.
• We have to use it judiciously and uh we got to protect it.
• We have to use it judiciously and uh we got to protect it.
• We have to use it judiciously and uh we got to protect it.
• judiciously and uh we got to protect it. judiciously and uh we got to protect it. the<00:31:04.960

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee convened for its first meeting, called the roll, elected co-chairs under KRS 248.723, and approved the prior meeting minutes. Representative Michael Pollock was elected House co-chair and Senator Jason Howell was elected Senate co-chair, allowing the meeting to proceed. The Agricultural Development Board then reported on activity from December 2024 through April 2025. Staff described board and finance corporation funding totals for each month, county council meeting activity, leadership trainings, lender trainings, and outreach events such as Kentucky Proud breakfast, Ag Tag Month, and agriculture education week. The report also highlighted several funded projects: a Whitesburg farmers market project for Cowan Community Action Group, Community Farm Alliance’s work supporting farmers markets and nutrition programs, a Metcalfe County 4-H ham project, Hopkinsville Elevator’s rail expansion, and W and W Veterinary Services’ large-animal facility upgrade. Members discussed the importance of the tobacco settlement funds and the committee’s stewardship role. Senator Webb urged new members to read House Bill 611 and its history, emphasizing careful use of the limited funds and noting the committee’s statutory mission. Representative King asked about possible federal nutrition policy changes, and staff said Kentucky is already pursuing a “Food as Medicine” initiative and a partnership with the Kentucky Hospital Association. The meeting also recognized interns and announced a June 20, 2025, 25th anniversary event for the Agricultural Development Fund at the Kentucky History Center.

Transcript Highlights:

• State agencies seeking approval include the Judicial Department for the Family Treatment Court Program
• consent grants from the Public Safety Subcommittee and open up a work session on Item 1 from the Judicial
• The Public Safety Subcommittee heard a request from the Judicial Department on State Court Facility Security
• the account and includes $300,000 for enhanced digital privacy protection for judges and high-risk judicial
• Subcommittee recommends the Emergency Board increase other funds expenditure limitation for the Judicial

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: The Emergency Board met on June 17, 2026, and approved a series of subcommittee recommendations, mostly on consent, related to federal grant applications, agency funding adjustments, and position authority. Early actions included approval of four federal grant applications from natural resources agencies, three public safety grant applications, a one-time increase for Judicial Department court security, retroactive approval for an AmeriCorps volunteer-generation grant, and a $7.5 million allocation to Southern Oregon University from a special appropriation for short-term financial stability. Members supporting the SOU item emphasized the university’s structural deficits, declining enrollment, and the need for a long-term higher education plan; several members voted no or raised concerns about sustainability, but the motion passed. The board also approved a federal apprenticeship expansion grant for the Higher Education Coordinating Commission, a school nutrition equipment grant for the Department of Education, and an Oregon Health Authority request tied to Medicaid community engagement requirements under H.R. 1. Public safety items included funding for Oregon Military Department readiness facilities, a report on the stalled juvenile justice information system modernization project with a follow-up viability report due in 2026, and a statewide evacuation planning tool for emergency management. The evacuation tool drew strong support as a wildfire preparedness measure, with members noting it could significantly reduce alert times and save lives. A major point of debate was the Department of Justice request to add 16 permanent positions and increase other funds limitation for antitrust enforcement. Supporters argued the federal government has pulled back and Oregon needs capacity to pursue active cases and protect consumers; opponents objected to the process, the size of the expansion, and the incentive structure tied to settlements and awards. Despite those concerns, the motion passed. The board also approved Water Resources Department requests for the Water Well Abandonment, Repair and Replacement program, an assistant water master position in Washington County, and federal funding for Lower Umatilla Basin groundwater data collection. The water master item prompted questions about county cost shifts, but staff said the position would remain externally funded and would not be filled without those resources.

Transcript Highlights:

• unconstitutional, but at the same time, our role as the legislative branch is different than the role of the judicial
• unconstitutional, but at the same time, our role as the legislative branch is different than the role of the judicial
• branch is different than the role<00:21:20.400> of<00:21:20.520> the<00:21:20.600> judicial
• <00:21:21.720> It's<00:21:22.040> their role of the judicial branch.
• It's their role of the judicial branch.

Keywords: Judiciary, Division A (Part 2) - Room 409, 3 March, 2026; 4:15 P.M., 925, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 1752, which had already passed Judiciary A, gone to Appropriations, and returned with an amendment. The chair explained that the amendment froze a rate increase that had been included by LBR and instead set the amount at $150,100 on a two-year schedule for further review. The committee adopted the amendment and then passed the bill on a title-sufficient-do-pass motion. The committee then considered House Bill 1603, described as a cleanup measure related to last year’s squatters law. Counsel explained that it removed language stating that a squatter who commits trespass or remains on another person’s property shall not accrue property rights based on that conduct. After a brief question about what the bill removed, the committee passed it on a title-sufficient-do-pass motion. The main discussion centered on House Bill 1224, a strike-all for the Keeping Kids Safe Online Act, which the chair described as a revised version of the Walker Montgomery law. The chair said the original House bill raised serious constitutional concerns, especially around age verification, First Amendment issues, and overbreadth, and noted Justice Kavanaugh’s comments in the Walker Montgomery litigation suggesting the prior law was likely unconstitutional. He said the strike-all would create a task force, include a reverse repealer, and use language modeled on laws in Florida and Virginia, with the goal of producing a bill that could withstand legal challenge. Several senators questioned whether the committee should move forward with a bill that might still be vulnerable, while others emphasized the need to protect children online and referenced Mr. Montgomery’s advocacy and the book Anxious Generation. The chair said industry representatives from Google, Facebook, TikTok, and NetChoice had expressed willingness to discuss a workable compromise, and he indicated the committee could still go to conference and potentially return to the House version if needed.

Transcript Highlights:

• How will this impact transparency in that particular situation? Senator Rodriguez: Thank you, Mr.
• It's not meant to hide transparency.
• But I believe that this legislation will help with processes and transparency.
• How does this bill ensure transparency and accountability in those arrangements?
• It ensures due process, protects the integrity of judicial appointments, and balances parental rights

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, opened with prayer and the Pledge, and heard several member introductions and recognitions. The Rules Chair moved CS/CS/SB 622 to the end of the special order calendar, which was adopted without objection. SB 80 on state land management was temporarily postponed, as were later bills SB 716 and CS/CS/CS/SB 1348. The chamber then took up a series of bills, often substituting House companions and adopting amendments before final passage. Measures approved included a comprehensive waste reduction and recycling plan (HB 295, 38-0), mitigation banking and land development changes with a phosphate mining lands amendment (CS/CS/SB 492, 35-3), aggravated animal cruelty with a searchable FDLE database and sentencing multiplier (HB 255, 37-0), the Spectrum Alert for missing children with autism and related training/funding (HB 711, 37-0), newborn screening for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (CS/CS/HB 1089, 36-0), and revisions to the My Safe Florida Condominium Pilot Program to expand eligible mitigation projects and adjust approval thresholds (CS/CS/HB 393, 37-0). The Senate also passed workforce education legislation allowing charter schools access to grant funding and expanding money-back guarantees (HB 1145, 37-0), a statewide study on automation and workforce impact (HB 827, 35-0), parole guideline revisions (HB 181, 37-0), court-appointed psychologist procedures in family law cases (HB 901, 37-0), sexual cyber harassment protections covering digitally forged intimate images (HB 1451, 37-0), a home health aide program for medically fragile children with training and reimbursement provisions (CS/CS/SB 1156, 37-0), substance abuse and mental health care changes including 988 oversight and involuntary examination procedures (HB 1091, 37-0), a feasibility study for a statewide pond data database (HB 1359, 37-0), and Department of Law Enforcement housekeeping changes and retired police dog reimbursements (HB 1053, 37-0). The most extensive debate centered on the charter schools bill (HB 443), which expanded charter autonomy, reporting parity, enrollment flexibility, and governance rules; after a delete-all amendment and a friendly amendment, it was placed on the third-reading calendar rather than immediately voted on. Several bills were briefly discussed with concerns about transparency, accountability, funding, and constitutional issues, but all bills brought to a vote during this segment passed.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, you know, this committee has that responsibility of working with the Judicial Branch and working
• So, Judicial Branch, CSSD.
• Partnership with the State Department of Education, the Judicial Branch's Court Support Services Division
• : there's going to be an analysis... ...the Judicial Branch's Court Support Services Division, there's
• And so they've been working with various agencies across state government, DCF, and the Judicial Branch

Keywords: 962, all

Summary: The Juvenile Justice Policy and Oversight Committee (JJPOC) met for administrative updates, approved the April meeting minutes, and discussed a proposed shift from monthly full committee meetings to a quarterly schedule beginning later this year. Members generally supported the change, saying it would reduce strain on agency and committee resources and allow more time for work groups to complete implementation tasks. Several members also asked for more flexible agendas and a clearer way to add issues between meetings, with staff suggesting a standardized form for submitting topics in advance. Work group updates covered cross-agency data sharing, diversion, education, incarceration, and community expertise. The data-sharing group reported continued work on the Equity Dashboard 2.0, a statewide expulsions analysis, municipal-level data collaboration with UConn’s IMRP, and a cross-system analysis of crossover youth. The diversion group described work on POST curriculum revisions for juvenile law, a youth-focused law enforcement interaction training, a community-police relationship toolkit, expansion of youth diversion teams, and pre-arrest diversion policy. The education group is reviewing implementation of the law creating educational oversight in juvenile facilities, along with a free public transportation pilot for high school students and truancy cleanup legislation. The incarceration group is tracking conditions of confinement, DOC restraint and chemical agent reports, the DOJ settlement monitoring process, the reentry success plan, and gender-responsive programming. The community expertise group emphasized elevating lived experience, youth voice, prevention, and conditions of confinement, with members urging the committee to focus on stability, infrastructure, and meaningful use of lived-experience perspectives. A major presentation from OPM outlined Connecticut’s effort to re-enter the federal Title II juvenile justice formula grant program. OPM explained the program’s core compliance requirements, including deinstitutionalization of status offenders, adult jail and lockup removal, sight-and-sound separation, and addressing racial and ethnic disparities. Staff said Connecticut is currently not fully compliant because of issues including youth being held in adult facilities and the state’s six-hour detention rule, and that Title II funding is on hold while OPM works toward compliance. OPM is developing a monitoring manual, identifying facilities to be monitored, and forming a state advisory group (SAG) to support the application and compliance process. Members questioned why a separate SAG is needed, whether JJPOC or the community expertise group could serve that role, and how lived-experience members would be selected; OPM said federal rules require the SAG to include youth or parents with lived experience and that the group cannot be composed of state or government employees in the key leadership roles. The committee agreed to circulate the federal parameters and ask members to suggest candidates for the SAG and to help move compliance work forward over the summer.

Transcript Highlights:

• That claim is the court security officers that are stationed in all of the judicial centers around the
• That claim is the court security officers that are stationed in all of the judicial centers around the
• officers that are stationed in all of officers that are stationed in all of the<00:15:19.600> judicial
• 20.959> around<00:15:21.279> the<00:15:21.440> state<00:15:21.680> to the judicial
• centers around the state to the judicial centers around the state to protect<00:15:22.240> the

Keywords: Call to Order: 00;15 Approval of Minutes: 01:22 Update on Generator replacement: 01:52 Update on Sheriff Fees: 13:28 Adjournment: 25:22, 958, all

Summary: The committee met for its fourth budget subreview session focused on personnel, public retirements, and finance. Members approved the minutes from the prior meeting and then heard from Finance Cabinet staff on two main items: a $7.5 million request related to generator systems and a sheriff’s fees budget request. The generator request was described as a preventive, life-cycle replacement and capacity-enhancement effort for 26 generators serving Frankfort-area state buildings, intended to protect continuity of government and expand beyond basic emergency power to support continuity of services. Members asked detailed questions about how many generators would be replaced, the cost per unit, the scope of the study, and whether the work could be phased. Staff said the $7.5 million would cover a full evaluation and any resulting engineering/replacement work, but the exact number of replacements was not yet known. They estimated the initial study would cost about $500,000 to $750,000, would take six to nine months once funded, and would produce building-by-building recommendations. Staff also said typical generator life cycles vary widely, often around 15 to 20 years but sometimes longer depending on run hours and usage. The committee then reviewed sheriff’s fees, with the Division of Local Government explaining that the state reimburses counties for several statutory sheriff-related costs, especially court security, which accounts for more than 90% of the claims. Staff said the current budget base is about $20 million, while actual spending has been running above $23 million, leading to a $3.5 million growth request to align the base with projected spending and reduce the need for non-general fund expenditure (NGE) adjustments. Members asked about claim volume, county participation, reimbursement controls, and whether the request reflected growth or underfunding; staff said all 120 counties submit claims, volumes have been fairly steady, and reimbursements are governed by statute and signed monthly certifications. No votes were taken on the requests, and the meeting adjourned after questions concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• To be the presiding judge of the Sixth Administrative Judicial Region: Kirsten B. Cahoon-Burney.
• substitute for Senate Bill 1574, relating to a Centers of Excellence program developed by the Texas Judicial
• Members, the Centers of Excellence program is an initiative by the Texas Judicial Council.
• The Texas Judicial Council is for certain justices and judges.
• Committee substitute Senate Bill 1574 relating to a Centers of Excellence program developed by the Texas Judicial

Bills: SCR46, SB31, SB39, SB227, SB330, SB401, SB407, SB467, SB482, SB500, SB506, SB512, SB527, SB584, SB619, SB636, SB646, SB647, SB648, SB659, SB663, SB715, SB732, SB758, SB801, SB816, SB847, SB870, SB884, SB1020, SB1055, SB1065, SB1137, SB1169, SB1181, SB1283, SB1383, SB1395, SB1410, SB1433, SB1490, SB1558, SB1574, SB1626, SB1666, SB1718, SB1727, SB1756, SB1757, SB1845, SB1924, SB1964, SB1972, SB2018, SB2031, SB2075, SB2076, SB2080, SB2111, SB2117, SB2154, SB2161, SB2173, SB2206, SB2225, SB2253, SB2268, SB2314, SB2322, SB2351, SB2371, SB2476, SB2533, SB2540, SB2570, SB2589, SB2623, SB2658, SB2660, SB2692, SB2693, SB2717, SB2722, SB2753, SB2779, SB2877, SB2880, SB2900, SB2920, SB3031, HJR4, SB5, SB260, SB1786, SJR3, SJR18, SB1, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SJR84, SJR59, SCR12, SCR39, SCR46, SCR48, SCR19, SB2023, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB1502, SB507, SB1026, SB1433, SB1434, SB1376, SB1585, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB619, SB1122, SB732, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB261, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB529, SB209, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB510, SB1924, SB2253, SB2018, SB2206, SB584, SB1085, SB1490, SB2314, SB2046, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB1524, SB1137, SB636, SB2056, SB1558, SB884, SB227, SB517, SB1200, SB1410, SB1626, SB1845, SB1863, SB2681, SB2200, SB2199, SB1757, SB2050, SB2458, SB2201, SB1055, SB2660, SB2662, SB1065, SB801, SB2533, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB648, SB647, SB512, SB1721, SB2268, SB2366, SB1013, SB2692, SB2570, SB2797, SB2111, SB2371, SB2383, SB646, SB1169, SB1754, SB1718, SB2779, SB2004, SB1756, SB2119, SB527, SB2322, SB2448, SB1777, SB1283, SB407, SB2392, SB2076, SB2786, SB3031, SB2877, SB2876, SB2284, SB2225, SB1540, SB2920, SB2929, SB1395, SB1972, SB2540, SB2742, SB2595, SB2217, SB2117, SB715, SB2330, SB1964, SB1383, SB500, SB1640, SB2001, SB2080, SB2722, SB506, SB2514, SB2623, SB2658, SB1574, SB2900, SB2753, SB2398, SB401, SB1241, SB2927, SB2173, SB2538, SB898, SB467, SB1449, SB2529, SB1531, SB2846, SB2476, SB2031, SB986, SB1181, SB2075, SB2154, SB2864, SB31, SB2880, SB1359, SB2386, SB771, SB2844, SB2550, SB1351, SB1423, SB1931, SB2245, SB2589, SB2707, SB2807, SB2351, SB410, SB659, SB816, SB2776, SB2693, SB2580, SB1980, SB1886, SB1234, SB739, SB482, SB456, SB127, SB1666, SB2843, SB2801, SB800, SB2055, SB784, SB2986, SB735, SB1012, SB324, SB2926, SB2938, SB2007, SB2138, SB1242, HJR4, HB135, HB1109, SCR30, SCR3, SB2615, SB1049, SB2310, SB1224, SB2972, SB1568, SB2841, SB2885, SB3016, SB2858, SB2610, SB2139, SB1856, SB2035, SB2308, SB2306, SB2041, SB1528, SB1681, SB1141, SB2401, SB2530, SB2375, SB547, SB1266, SB1373, SB1467, SB2069, SB2269, SB2480, SB2544, SB672, SB904, SB2695, SB2891, SB2422, SB2543, SB1854, SB317, SB2539, SB2532, SB2925, SB1250, SB2082, SB2203, SB457, SB2357, HCR35, HCR64

Keywords: Texas beef, cattle industry, agricultural heritage, Texas strip steak, economic growth, SB 31, Life of the Mother Act, Texas abortion law, medical emergency, reasonable medical judgment, pregnancy complications, maternal health, life-threatening condition, ectopic pregnancy, spontaneous abortion, miscarriage, unborn child, abortion exception, abortion ban, physician liability

Transcript Highlights:

• Moving on to tab 7, item 2566, Judicial Council. Any members of the committee have any question?
• 16:35.920> to<00:16:36.160> tab 7.<00:16:41.360> Item 2566,<00:16:47.360> Judicial
• Item 2566, Judicial Council.
• Again, Judicial Council. item 2566. Is there any further item 2566.
• 00:17:14.160> item 25677. 25677. 25677. 067.<00:17:20.160> Again,<00:17:20.559> judicial

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Fiscal Committee met on March 21, 2025, accepted the February 21 minutes, and approved a shortened consent calendar after removing Department of Safety item 2565 for separate discussion. That item concerned drone/UAS detection for special events and critical infrastructure. Department staff said the system would help locate drones and operators and support enforcement around temporary flight restrictions, but members pressed them on privacy versus security, and the department acknowledged the issue was primarily about security. The committee ultimately approved the item after discussion. Members also approved Department of Transportation item 2572 after a question about whether increased transfer requests would affect paving; DOT said the paving program would continue as normal. Judicial Council items 2566 and 2567 were also approved without discussion. During informational items, members asked for follow-up on Fish and Game’s Hike Safe card revenues versus search-and-rescue costs, and on DHHS reporting issues, including nursing home bed counts and declining community mental health center client numbers; DHHS said it would verify the bed-count methodology and provide a written update on the mental health data. The committee then entered non-public session to discuss an ongoing legal matter and related funding process. After returning, it considered a request under RSA 21-M:11 for an additional $5 million general fund appropriation for fiscal year 2025. Several members said they would have preferred the full $15 million request, but supported the smaller amount as a temporary step during the budget process, with expectations of monthly reporting back to the committee. The motion to approve $5 million passed 6-3. The committee set its next meeting for Friday, April 18 at 11:00 a.m. and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Speaker, I move that the House suspend the special and continuing joint order relating to judicial elections
• Order relating to judicial elections until Tuesday, March 10, 2026, at the conclusion of the morning
• Delegate Maldonado moves that the House suspend the special and continuing joint resolution related to judicial
• of H.J.R. 29, the Senate has agreed to suspend the special and continuing joint order relating to judicial

Keywords: March 05, 2026 - Regular Session, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• were stunned to learn that Florida's wrongful death statue denies or family access to the Florida judicial
• First, the bill clarifies the duty judge requirement enacted in 19. 35 to reflect that each judicial
• circuit currently to reflect that each judicial circuit currently has more than one circuit judge and
• And finally, the bill creates an alternative option for judicial authentication of oats affidavits and

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• observations, and if you think that's something that we need to fix, or if that's just maybe something for Judicial
• that's fix or if that's just um maybe that's something<00:34:34.960> for<00:34:35.200> judicial
• c><00:34:35.679> college,<00:34:36.079> I<00:34:36.240> don't something for judicial
• college, I don't something for judicial college, I don't know. know. know.
• our community and our nation that we are ensuring a high standard of care and we're committed to transparency

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee approved the October 22, 2025 minutes and then heard a presentation from the Child Fatality and Near Fatality External Review Panel on accidental ingestion of illegal drug products by children. Panel members said pediatric ingestions have become the most common case type they review, with the highest-risk children ages one to four, and that fatal cases have increased in recent years. They reported that the substances most often involved are fentanyl, cannabinoids including THC products, methamphetamine, and increasingly xylazine; they also noted a decline in buprenorphine-related ingestions, which they viewed as a positive trend. The panel used several case examples to highlight recurring problems in investigations and medical response, including delayed DCBS involvement, failure to administer Narcan, inadequate drug testing, lack of child abuse team involvement, and limited or absent law enforcement investigation. They said law enforcement issues are especially common in pediatric ingestion cases and are concentrated in Jefferson County and the Bluegrass/KIPA regions. One example involved a one-year-old who died from fentanyl and Benadryl intoxication; another involved a two-year-old who died after ingesting multiple substances; and a third involved a four-year-old with near-fatal THC gummy ingestion where delayed treatment worsened the child’s condition. They also described a 10-month-old THC ingestion case that resulted in a criminal abuse conviction, which they presented as an example without missed investigative opportunities. Committee members discussed possible policy responses, including creating a more specific criminal child abuse offense or clarifying existing abuse and neglect definitions to cover unsafe access to illegal drugs, while preserving room for true accidents and prescribed medications. Members also raised the need for statewide standardization in reporting, investigation, and medical response, and suggested the panel should be able to call in agencies such as law enforcement, DCBS, judges, and hospitals for closed-session review of selected cases. The panel chair said they were already pursuing meetings with LMPD and would provide Jefferson County-specific breakdowns, and members expressed interest in additional data and agency follow-up before considering legislation.

Transcript Highlights:

• > matters, Full transparency on what matters, Full transparency on what matters, protected<00:
• It's transparency and accountability.
• <01:24:52.640> and the citizen's right to transparency and the citizen's right to transparency
• ,<01:29:36.399> uh comes to asking for transparency, uh comes to asking for transparency,
• <03:26:59.199> It's transparency. So, this is not that. It's transparency.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Previously, a minor of any age could marry with parental consent and judicial approval, and that 2017
• It requires judicial approval, interviews to check for potential abuse, rape, domestic violence, or trafficking
• In the judicial system. They stopped and said, hey, are you OK?

Bills: HB168

Keywords: certificates of obligation, local government debt, municipal finance, county finance, public works, bond election, voter petition, registered voters, refinancing certificates, Texas Local Government Code, municipality, county, hospital district, infrastructure financing, public improvement, debt issuance, general obligation alternative, public oversight, local bonds, historic preservation

Transcript Highlights:

• Speaker, I think this amendment is about patient protection and transparency.
• Transparency, Mr. Speaker, gentlelady, it's about patient confidence, not disrespect.
• Kind of scope of laser procedure transparencies for patients or surgeries. Thank you, Mr.
• We are ranked 40th for transparency among our. ranked 40th for transparency among our states, neighboring
• Speaker and Body, the intention of this is transparency. Mr.

Bills: HB145, HB164, HR1, HB20, HB65, HB66, HB80, HB306, SB29, SB37, HB99, HB206, HB213, HB270, SB104, SB193, HB38, HB254, HB256, SB58, SB64, HJM1, HM7, HM17, HM4, HM22, HM23, HM24, HM26, HM2, HM16, HM32, HM13, HM47, HM20, HM51, HM1, HM31, HM35, HM36, HM46, HM53, HM54, HM39, HM29, HM43, HM59, HM11, HM14, HM21, HM34, HM50, HB253

Keywords: high-wage jobs, tax credit, job creation, New Mexico, economic development, lobbying, transparency, public records, government oversight, accountability, House Resolution 1, HR1, House investigatory subcommittee, special committee, legislative investigation, subpoena power, public corruption, criminal activity, Zorro ranch, Santa Fe County

Transcript Highlights:

• some other people to help me, and we're going to bring in again the bill that would allow a quasi-judicial
• reports in our legislative body, in order to leave a record of our legislative intent for future judicial
• reports in our legislative body, in order to leave a record of our legislative intent for future judicial
• review process to go back and judicial review process to go back and take<01:29:53.480> a<01:
• legislative intent for future judicial legislative intent for future judicial review<01:30:16.760

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• schools from allowing immigration action to occur on school grounds unless they are presented with a judicial
• Specifically, it requires<00:03:41.440> proper<00:03:41.840> judicial<00:03:42.319>
• warrants, requires proper judicial warrants, requires proper judicial warrants, identifications,<
• Do they have a judicial warrant? Then they can have access. Do they not? No.
• Do they have a judicial warrant? Then they can have access. Do they not? No.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House File 3435 was moved before the committee and, after an author’s DE1 amendment was offered and adopted, the bill was sent to the general register. The bill, as described by Co-Chair Jordan, would limit immigration enforcement on school grounds unless agents present a judicial warrant, identification, and notify school leadership; supporters said it is intended to create clear separation between ICE/DHS activity and schools while preserving local law enforcement responses to other emergencies. Testimony was overwhelmingly in support of the bill. School leaders, teachers, union representatives, and Education Minnesota’s general counsel argued that immigration enforcement near schools has caused fear, absenteeism, disrupted operations, and serious mental health harms for students and staff. Several witnesses described students carrying passports or birth certificates, families keeping children home, and schools shifting large numbers of students to virtual learning. Speakers from districts in the Twin Cities and greater Minnesota said the presence of ICE or federal agents near schools and bus stops has undermined attendance, trust, and the ability to teach and learn. Witnesses also emphasized that the bill would provide needed clarity for educators and administrators about how to respond if federal agents come to school property. Some speakers framed the issue as protecting all children and families, including immigrant and refugee communities, and said schools should remain safe, stable places focused on education rather than immigration enforcement. No opposition testimony or committee vote beyond adoption of the DE1 amendment and the motion to place the bill on the general register was shown in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Supreme Court and the judicial branch may have a problem with that.
• government whether it's the judicial government whether it's the judicial branch<00:21:26.320>
• The supreme court uh<00:22:50.159> and<00:22:50.320> the<00:22:50.480> judicial<
• branch may have a uh and the judicial branch may have a problem<00:22:51.840> with<00:22:52.080
• This is a proposed House Concurrent Resolution declaring that the directives of the judicial branch in

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee began by explaining that the meeting was a work session and that votes would only be taken where there was clear consensus. CACR 6, the proposed constitutional amendment on a “right to compute,” was discussed first but not acted on because the prime sponsor was absent. Members raised concerns about whether the issue belonged in the constitution and what the amendment would mean in practice, and the chair recessed the matter for a future meeting. HB 74, concerning the definition of “citizen” for the right-to-know law and disclosure of preliminary drafts circulated to a quorum or majority of a public body, drew little support. Members noted the Senate’s prior rejection of a related bill and agreed the proposal was unlikely to advance. A motion to ITL the bill passed unanimously by roll call, 15-0, and the bill was placed on the consent calendar. HB 232, dealing with rights of conscience for medical professionals, was also recessed. Members said they had not yet seen the amendment, which was described as narrowing the bill to abortion-related issues and limiting penalties. Several members said they could not judge the bill without the amendment and expected disagreement, so the chair recessed it. HB 253, on interest-bearing pooled trust accounts maintained by lawyers, was discussed at length; the chair said the bill did not address the underlying IOLTA issue and would likely create conflict with the bar and judiciary. Members cited existing Supreme Court procedures and suggested the bill was unnecessary. A straw vote showed support for interim study and ITL, and the committee ultimately voted 15-0 to place HB 253 on consent. HB 293, aimed at preventing minors from accessing obscene material on internet-connected devices, prompted substantial debate. Members generally supported the goal but objected to the bill’s private right of action, its focus on manufacturers rather than content providers or internet platforms, uncertainty about the filtering technology required, and concerns about defining obscenity on a national rather than community basis. The committee discussed forming a subcommittee to work on the bill further, and members volunteered to serve, indicating the issue would be revisited rather than voted on immediately.

Transcript Highlights:

• system and that Docket in our judicial system and that is<03:30:23.359> one<03:30:23.479>
• <03:30:56.199> system to have expertise in the judicial system to have expertise in the judicial
• <03:54:29.239> system appreciate in here uh a judicial system appreciate in here uh a judicial
• The judicial system would only come if there were a lot of profitable blockchain business.
• And wouldn't that be a loss to the judicial system either way?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on House Bill 552, which would remove the “full-time student” requirement for children ages 19 to 25 covered under the state retiree health insurance plan. The prime sponsor said the change would align retiree coverage with state employee and ACA plans, would not cost taxpayers because retirees pay the premiums, and could even reduce administrative burden and possibly state costs. The chair noted the bill simply removes the words “if full-time student” from statute and said the proposal affects very few retirees and has no cost to the state. No opposition was presented, and the chair closed the hearing on HB 552 after no further testimony. The committee then opened a public hearing on House Bill 648, which would require commercial insurance coverage for glucose monitoring devices and supplies for people with diabetes. The prime sponsor, a retired dietitian and diabetes educator, gave extensive testimony describing diabetes as common, costly, and serious, and argued that continuous glucose monitoring is important for managing type 2 and gestational diabetes, preventing hypoglycemia, and improving safety and decision-making. She said CGMs can alert users to dangerous blood sugar changes, help people understand how food, activity, and medication affect glucose, and save lives while offering a strong return on investment. During questions, a committee member asked whether the bill should specify that the monitoring be tied to prescribed treatment, and the sponsor agreed that adding “prescribed” would be appropriate. The member also asked about the proper threshold for coverage and whether the bill should be tied to fasting-test diagnosis; the sponsor responded that A1C is only one measure of control and does not show daily fluctuations, and said she was not prepared to recommend a specific threshold but could provide clinical guidelines later. No vote was taken during the hearing, and the sponsor indicated support for the bill’s general approach to broader CGM access.