Transcript Highlights:

• protest.
• It's during that process that the bidders are generally being starved of information, and then the protests
• My specialty is not bid protest. No, bid processes. Bidding processes for private companies, so...
• I want to make the connection between the public information act process and the procurement process.
• . processes and their management.

Bills: HB 111, HB1545, HB2145, HB2467, HB2520, HB4136, HB4181, HB4214, HB4218, HB4219, HB4359, HB4437, HB4822, HB111

Keywords: Texas Public Information Act, open records, public records, government transparency, confidentiality, attorney-client privilege, governmental body, Chapter 552, public information law, nonprofit association, quasi-governmental entity, economic development, trade secrets, proprietary information, commercial financial information, Alamo restoration, local workforce board, TDCJ contract facility, civil commitment facility, water supply corporation

Transcript Highlights:

• So this mimics that process.
• Process.
• So how is that due process?
• Peaceful protests are usually met with violence. It’s not part of peaceful protest.
• What process and what remedies do they have? What process and what remedies do they have?

Bills: S0500, S0536, S0762, S1582, S1632, S1634, S1742, S1750, S1792

Keywords: security detail, protective detail, candidate protection, election security, statewide office, governor, lieutenant governor, cabinet officer, nominee, officer-elect, FDLE, Florida Department of Law Enforcement, primary election, general election, canvassing commission, political party, minor party, campaign safety, election protection, public safety

Summary: The committee first considered SB 536, which updates Florida’s criminal gang statutes to reflect modern recruitment and communication methods, including social media and encrypted messaging. Senator Martin and supporters said the bill does not criminalize gang membership, but helps law enforcement and prosecutors establish gang-related connections for warrants and sentencing enhancements. Senator Smith raised concerns about the lowered threshold for being observed with gang members and possible unintended impacts on business owners and others; Martin said the language was not intended to cover ordinary business interactions and that a gang tattoo must be one used by the gang. After an amendment aligning the Senate bill with the House version was adopted, the committee reported CS/SB 536 favorably. The committee also favorably reported CS/SB 762, which allows chief judges to assign capital conflict cases across regional counsel offices, with an amendment requiring judges to consider judicial economy and geographic proximity. Testimony from regional counsel emphasized projected long-term savings, estimated at about $150 million over 10 years. The committee then approved CS/SB 1742, creating a new indecent exposure offense involving sexual conduct directed at minors, and CS/SB 1750, which increases penalties for serious sex crimes and child sexual abuse material offenses; both bills were amended before passage, with law enforcement groups appearing in support. The committee next took up SB 1582, which creates statewide data sharing for secondhand dealer and pawnbroker transactions without creating a new state-run database, while preserving confidentiality protections and law enforcement access. An amendment was adopted, and pawnbroker and recycling stakeholders testified in support. The linked public records bill, SB 1792, creating an exemption for those transaction records while allowing certain information to be released to alleged owners, was also reported favorably. The committee then approved CS/SB 500, which provides FDLE protective security details to major party nominees for governor, lieutenant governor, and cabinet offices after primary certification and until the general election is resolved; a technical amendment was adopted, and the bill was described as mirroring federal candidate protection practices. The longest and most contentious discussion was on CS/SB 1632, which would bar Florida courts from enforcing foreign or religious law in a way that overrides the U.S. or Florida constitutions and would create a process for designating foreign or domestic terrorist organizations, with related consequences for schools, funding, and student conduct. Senator Grall said the bill is intended to protect constitutional principles and target violent, criminal conduct rather than protected speech or religious practice, and she explained that designations would follow a public process with judicial review. Senators Smith and Polsky pressed repeatedly on First Amendment, due process, vagueness, and academic-speech concerns, asking how “promotion” would be defined and whether students, attorneys, or advocacy groups could be swept in; Grall said she was open to clarifying language but maintained the bill is aimed at furthering illegal acts, not mere opinion. Numerous speakers opposed the bill, warning it could be used to target Muslim students, religious communities, advocacy groups, and political dissent, while a few supporters argued it was needed for public safety. The transcript ends during public testimony on SB 1632, with no final committee vote shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Violence is the antithesis of protest. It seeks to shut down the protest.
• peacefully protested against it. peacefully protested against it.
• protests and sets the facts straight. protests and sets the facts straight.
• peaceful protests are patriotic. peaceful protests are patriotic.
• We call it a bird process. We call it a bird process.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Friday, June 27, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• What's the process right now?
• But what is the process? I mean, is it.
• We call it a due process. Yes, sir.
• Yeah, it all starts with the RSO. process, right?
• . process, the judge knows when he gives a ruling, huh, there's an appeals process. well, I am not God

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have seen why anonymity in protest is essential to avoid political persecution.
• We have seen why anonymity in protest is essential to avoid political persecution.
• The drafters of the FACE Act explicitly left room for protest while clarifying that protesters could
• It says it doesn't apply to peaceful protests, and the First Amendment doesn't protect disruptive protests
• It says it doesn't apply to peaceful protests, and the First Amendment doesn't protect disruptive protests

Bills: HB2244, HB2364, HB2573, HB2749, HB2862, HB2870, HB4117, HCR2004

Keywords: evictions, judgment satisfaction, tenant rights, landlord obligations, court procedures, abortion-inducing drugs, medical abortion, pharmaceutical regulation, felonies, state law, DUI, ignition interlock, substance abuse treatment, driving privileges, alcohol education, felony conviction, misdemeanor designation, court judgment, criminal justice reform, rehabilitation

Summary: The committee heard and acted on several bills. HB 2749, as amended, would allow certain nonviolent class 4, 5, or 6 felonies to be redesignated as class 1 misdemeanors after five years and after completion of sentence terms, with exclusions for crimes such as cruelty to animals, weapons misconduct, and failure to register as a sex offender. Supporters framed it as a redemption and reintegration measure, and the committee adopted the amendment and gave the bill a due pass recommendation on a 6-0 vote with one not voting. HB 2870 would prohibit certain level 2 and level 3 sex offenders from living together in the same single-family dwelling, with exceptions for relatives, community reentry centers, and certain existing supervised facilities. The sponsor and neighborhood residents described a real-life situation in Chandler involving multiple offenders in one house and argued the bill would protect families; opponents warned it could push people into homelessness and undermine supervision. After testimony from residents, housing operators, and a structured-housing provider, the committee approved the bill 3-2 with two not voting. HB 2862, which increases penalties for offenses committed while wearing a mask to conceal identity, drew support from the City of Scottsdale and opposition from the ACLU over First Amendment concerns; it passed 3-2 with two not voting. HB 2364 would create criminal penalties for mailing or delivering abortion-inducing drugs, including felony penalties for providers and a misdemeanor for ordering such drugs by mail. Supporters said it would enforce existing law and protect women; opponents argued it conflicts with Proposition 139 and constitutional protections for abortion access. The committee gave it a 4-3 due pass recommendation. HB 2244, supported by Phoenix Vice Mayor Keisha Hodge Washington, would streamline satisfaction of eviction judgments when tenants have paid and allow sealing of eviction records in some cases; it passed unanimously 7-0. HB 2573, which removes the 45-day waiting period before some repeat DUI offenders can apply for an ignition interlock restricted license, also passed unanimously 7-0. The committee also considered HB 4117, a strike-everything amendment creating a new offense for interfering with a religious service or worship by obstructing access or engaging in disorderly conduct intended to disrupt the service. Supporters, including ADL and Jewish community representatives, said it would protect worshippers from obstruction and intimidation; opponents argued it was vague, unnecessary, and could chill protest speech. After extensive debate, the committee adopted the strike-everything amendment and gave the bill a due pass recommendation. Finally, HCR 2004, a mirror resolution to SCR 1004, would require voter approval for local photo enforcement systems and periodic reauthorization; it was discussed with support from city and league representatives, but the transcript ends before a final vote on that measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• protest, we do so as a part of our budget process.
• review process and road standards.
• Just do it under a market value protest, not by reshaping an equity protest into something that it is
• Is this type of protest usually more effective?
• And we'll put a stop to the process.

Bills: SB467, SB325, SB867, SB994, SB1052, SB1237, SB1449, SB1531, SB2063, SB2172, SB2173, SB2520, SB2529, SB2538, SB2541, SJR46, SJR84

Keywords: SB 467, Texas property tax, ad valorem tax, homestead exemption, residence homestead, fire damage, house fire, destroyed home, temporary tax relief, appraisal district, chief appraiser, local taxing unit, tax rollback, tax refund, Tax Code Chapter 11, prorated exemption, homestead improvement, disaster relief, property tax exemption, residential property

Transcript Highlights:

• is the process of picking the bills? is the process of picking the bills?
• worship place of worship and protest. worship place of worship and protest.
• protest? protest?
• First Amendment right to peaceful protest. We're talking about peaceful protesting.
• , not make the process worse.

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Pro-Palestinian protests are spreading and becoming increasingly disruptive.
• One protester was seen carrying a Hamas flag. This movement is mushrooming. We are Hamas!
• But I do think there needs to be a process of doing that. Well, sure.
• that these anti-Israel, pro-Hamas, anti-Semitic protests that the tents all match?
• This process does not work.

Keywords: anti-Semitism, hate crimes, college campuses, civil rights, public safety, protests, intimidation

Summary: The committee meeting focused on addressing the rising tide of anti-Semitism across the nation. Among the discussions, members expressed concerns about the disturbing acts of hate witnessed on college campuses, with instances of harassment and intimidation targeting Jewish students being highlighted. High-profile incidents, including vandalism and the display of extremist symbols, prompted urgent calls for investigations and measures to protect civil rights. The importance of moral clarity in confronting such hate crimes was emphasized as well, outlining the responsibilities of leaders to ensure safety and uphold justice.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think—” “The exclusive focus of some of those protests.
• And the campus protest that followed offered a lucky break to exploit.
• In response, some campuses in Massachusetts have banned masks at all protests.
• I'll personally say I did not... protesting anti-Semitism.
• They have to understand and process those codes.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on Anti-Semitism met for its 11th meeting and approved the minutes from its August 7 meeting. Co-chairs said the commission had recently completed preliminary K-12 recommendations and would continue work on higher education, with additional topics such as workplace issues, the medical sector, and the arts to be addressed before the November 30 reporting deadline. They also said another public comment meeting would be held this fall. The first testimony came from Dr. Mark Posnansky of Harvard Medical School, who described anti-Semitism affecting STEM, research, and higher education. He said Jewish and Israeli students and faculty reported ostracism, gaslighting, intimidation, discrimination, and hiding Jewish identity, and he urged clear leadership statements, mandatory anti-Semitism education, and stronger reporting and discipline procedures. Commissioners asked about Harvard training, spillover into teaching hospitals, and whether anti-Semitic climates were causing students to leave; he said some students had turned down opportunities because of the environment and that concerns also affected healthcare settings. Lindsey Gabbo, a Harvard Law student and mother, testified that campus discourse after October 7 had made Jewish and Zionist students feel isolated and unwelcome, with protests, defaced hostage posters, and a student council BDS vote contributing to the climate. She said Harvard had sent some emails acknowledging anti-Semitism but that she had not seen meaningful steps to restore dialogue, and she argued the school needed more structured venues for conversation. Commissioners also asked about campus security, the effect on students’ mental health, and the impact of chants and protests that she said many Jewish students understood as calls to violence. A panel of concerned Jewish faculty and staff then offered contrasting views. Professor Jeremy Menchick argued the commission should use data carefully, include non-Zionist Jews in its analysis, and avoid reinforcing divisions within the Jewish community. Professor Hilary Lustick described restorative-practice approaches and said structured dialogue could address conflict without immediate punishment. Professor Jonathan Feingold warned that anti-Semitism was being weaponized by the Trump administration and right-wing groups to attack universities and DEI, and he urged the commission not to adopt approaches that could be used to undermine civil rights institutions. Commissioners pushed back on claims that the problem was being exaggerated or reduced to a “problem” rather than a “crisis,” and the discussion ended with continued debate over data, context, and how to balance anti-Semitism concerns with broader civil-rights protections.

Transcript Highlights:

• that have spewed homophobic language as part of their protest.”
• Protesting against a war, protesting against any political thing, does not become a religious service
• because somebody says a prayer in the middle of the protest.
• That's a political protest. That's not a religious service. That's a political protest.
• President, protest. Okay. Just on the group motion. On the group motion itself.

Summary: The Senate met in floor session, began with prayer and the Pledge, approved the journal, received communications, and handled a return of Senate Bill 1456 from the House for reconsideration. Members then moved through several Committee of the Whole calendars, considering and amending bills on court fees, information technology, environmental quality, agricultural property inspections, property tax notices, veterans services, zoning and electric generation siting, fuel and gas resilience, and disturbing religious services. Several amendments were adopted, including changes to HB 2265 on criminal court fees, HB 2311 on conversational AI disclosures and privacy limits, HB 2986 on environmental quality/fuel resilience, HB 2104 and HB 2105 on agricultural property inspection rules, HB 2406 on veterans services, HB 2494 on electric generation siting and environmental compatibility, HB 2696 on fuel and gas prices, and HB 4117 on interference with religious services. Most of these bills were reported out of committee with do pass recommendations, though members raised concerns on HB 2311 and HB 4117 about privacy, free speech, and prosecutorial discretion. The chamber then took up a long series of third readings and final votes. Bills passed included HB 2015 on single-audit compliance, HB 2041 on child neglect and poverty factors, HB 2048 on AHCCCS prescription drug coverage, HB 2417 on excessive speed, HB 2611 on child welfare, HB 2793 on annexation, HB 2950 on special districts, HB 2995 on family law, HB 4018 on county officers, HB 2404 on mental health services, HB 2279 on limitations of actions, HB 2502 on the state retirement system, HB 2733 and HB 2953 on pharmacy regulation, HB 2979 on credit unions, HB 4042 on parent-child relationship determinations, HB 4010 on health professional regulatory boards, HB 4043 on public schools, HB 4049 on the Attorney General, HB 2265 on court fees, HB 2311 on information technology, and HB 2986 on environmental quality. HB 2601 on state highways and routes failed. Several members explained votes on bills involving fiscal impacts, child welfare, road safety, annexation, and criminal justice concerns. The Senate also adopted a group concurrence motion on several conference committee reports, including HB 2003, HB 2010, HB 2133, and HB 2874, and then voted on those measures. HB 2003 on driver’s license instruction permits, HB 2010 on advertising, HB 2133 on disclosure of sexual material and synthetic depictions, and HB 2874 on campaign committees and termination statements were all advanced after conference committee action, with debate on HB 2133 focusing on First Amendment and content-moderation concerns. The session ended with introduction of a large package of transportation-related appropriations bills and a motion to suspend certain committee notice rules for Appropriations to hear legislation and strike-everything amendments on short notice.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:01:26.600> this essential to our Democratic process this essential to our Democratic process
• There's no due process involved in that.
• There's no due process involved in that.
• <00:21:15.480> whatever<00:21:15.880> processes that that process whatever processes
• that that process whatever processes they<00:21:16.640> have<00:21:17.000> cannot<00:21

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House File 768, sponsored by Vice Chair Hudson, was heard with an author’s amendment (A4) adopted to remove a technical section and put the bill in the intended form. Hudson described the bill as a response to concerns about government monitoring of protected speech, saying it would bar the Minnesota Department of Human Rights from creating or maintaining a database of constitutionally protected speech while preserving the department’s ability to investigate actual discrimination, harassment, threats, or illegal conduct. He emphasized First Amendment protections and argued the state should not track speech simply because it is controversial or unpopular. The main testimony in support came from Ran Lee of Americans for Prosperity, who echoed the free-speech concerns and said databases of bias incidents can capture lawful speech and create a chilling effect. Representative Rest said she generally supported the free-speech goal but wanted to preserve the Department of Human Rights’ ability to produce biennial reports and analyze de-identified trend data on civil rights incidents, including emerging threats or hateful rhetoric, so lawmakers can respond to patterns without recording individuals’ protected speech. Representative Curran raised concerns that speech trends can relate to public safety and argued that attacks on human rights often begin as speech. Hudson responded that the Department of Human Rights is not a law enforcement agency and that the bill would not impede criminal investigations. He argued that trying to monitor “trends in thought” would be constitutionally problematic and produce unreliable data, and he distinguished protected speech from criminal conduct. Representative Feist said the department’s existing report already uses aggregate, non-investigative data and suggested there may be room to refine the bill’s language. The bill was laid over for further consideration, with Hudson indicating he was open to continued discussion and possible language changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• conducts a protest in there's a protest conducts a protest in there's a protest going<03:29:44.560
• And I asked it in honesty. protest. protest.
• to the protest?
• to the protest?
• to protest. to protest.

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's about the democratic process, lowercase d, about the majority.
• The so-called neighbor protest. Process has been used to block numerous developments.
• But today, if just 20% of the adjacent property owners protest, that could be... be one person.
• Because why go through a discretionary process where you're going to be told terrible things?
• Specifically, cities would continue to have full public hearing. process for any zoning changes.

Bills: SB434, SB844, SB898, SB1177, SB1214, SB1454, SB1920, SB1927, SB1935, SB1965, SB2010, SB2046, SB2068, SB2073, SB2183, SB2260, SB3034, SB907

Keywords: SB 434, Harris County Hospital District, hospital district police, peace officers, commissioned officers, law enforcement authority, Health and Safety Code, Code of Criminal Procedure, public safety, hospital security, county hospital district, local government, Texas criminal procedure, district police, armed security, SB 898, low income housing tax credits, LIHTC, affordable housing, Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• Texas procedure for protesting zoning changes is among the strictest in the nation.
• The so-called neighbor protest process has been used to block numerous developments.
• But For adjacent landowners, we would go to a 60% protest threshold.
• Of all members of the governing body for protests.
• Or a majority of the members of the governing body for a protest.

Bills: SB 434, SB 844, SB 898, SB 1177, SB 1214, SB 1454, SB 1920, SB 1927, SB 1935, SB 1965, SB 2010, SB 2046, SB 2068, SB 2073, SB 2183, SB 2260, SB 3034, SB 907

Keywords: SB 434, Harris County Hospital District, hospital district police, peace officers, commissioned officers, law enforcement authority, Health and Safety Code, Code of Criminal Procedure, public safety, hospital security, county hospital district, local government, Texas criminal procedure, district police, armed security, SB 898, low income housing tax credits, LIHTC, affordable housing, Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• So it will allow protesters, say, to gather outside a privately owned Planned Parenthood clinic, you
• Protesting against a war, protesting against any political thing, does not become a religious service
• because somebody says a prayer in the middle of the protest.
• That's a political protest. That's not a religious service. That's a political protest.
• So one group might plan a rally to protest the current president or the current governor, and another

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This just process that took place.
• >> Uh, forming a protest is not the intent here.
• >> Uh, forming a protest is not the intent here.
• That's the to attend those protests.
• in this bill that allowed for a process in this bill that allowed for a process to<01:14:51.199>

Bills: HB0159

Keywords: student rights, free expression, K-12 education, speech protection, religious views, political speech, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The truth in taxation process requires.
• Well, they have the ability to protest.
• We're in the protest period now.
• . this in the formal ARB process, and we have such a short time frame to work those protests, so we basically
• It has been two distinct separate processes, the appraisal process to determine the proper size of. of

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• To suppress these protests and confuse the issue, politicians charge that protesters supporting Palestinian
• They declared it illegal for Palestinians to protest there.
• Students have every right to protest Israel's actions on campus, just as students once protested the
• many of the protests, pro-Israel counter-protesters have yelled at me that I'm not a real... ...of many
• of the protests, pro-Israel counter-protesters have yelled at me that I'm not a real Jew, spat at me

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission held a public comment hearing as it continued work toward a November 30 statutory deadline for its final report. The co-chairs reviewed logistics for the hybrid format, two-minute testimony limit, respectful conduct, and the plan to alternate between in-person and virtual speakers. The commission approved the minutes from its previous September 8 meeting by motion and vote, with no nays. Much of the testimony focused on how the commission should define antisemitism, especially whether to adopt the IHRA definition and whether it improperly conflates antisemitism with criticism of Israel or Zionism. Many speakers, including Jewish educators, rabbis, academics, students, and legislators, described personal experiences with antisemitism and urged the commission to address hate while protecting free speech, academic freedom, and the ability to criticize Israeli government policy. Several called for the commission to reject or narrow the IHRA definition and instead consider the Jerusalem Declaration or other frameworks that distinguish antisemitism from anti-Zionism. Others emphasized that antisemitism should be addressed alongside racism, Islamophobia, white nationalism, and other forms of bias, and some urged broader anti-bias training in schools. A smaller number of speakers supported stronger action against antisemitism in schools and public institutions, including concerns about antisemitic materials in education and about organizations or events they viewed as promoting hate. A recurring theme was the conflict in Gaza and its impact on the debate: some speakers condemned Israel’s military actions as genocide, apartheid, or colonialism and said criticism of those actions should not be treated as antisemitic, while others defended Israel, rejected genocide claims, and argued that anti-Israel activism can fuel antisemitism. Several speakers also raised concerns about campus discipline, union materials, and state facility rentals, and one speaker asked that state resources not be used by groups they viewed as inciting hate. No additional votes or formal actions were taken beyond approving the prior minutes and hearing public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• In fact, the protests have declined significantly, particularly frivolous protests.
• particularly F frivolous protests um particularly F frivolous protests um it's<00:33:01.279> not
• It opens the door for other protests.
• without triggering that bid protest without triggering that bid protest later<00:35:16.680> on
• it caused some limiting some protests it caused some protests<00:41:05.319> I<00:41:05.480>

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills related to consumer protection, liquor regulation, construction procurement, and state contracting. On House Bill 565, DCCA and the Office of Consumer Protection stood on written testimony, and a committee member raised a question about whether creators of remains would have to hold them indefinitely if family members did not respond; the member indicated language would be fixed to address that issue. No vote was taken. House Bill 208, dealing with liquor law changes, drew strong support from Scarlet Honolulu and Maui Brewing Company, who said the measure would modernize liquor rules and add guardrails, while the Wine Institute and Anheuser-Busch opposed it as a special tax break or unnecessary expansion of liquor-related authority. Members questioned whether anonymous complaints should be allowed and whether the bill could lead to retaliation; the supporter said complaints should not be anonymous and suggested the Liquor Commission had been accused of writing complaints to target licenses. No action was taken. House Bill 939, concerning taxation of low-ABV spirits-based beverages, received support from Maui Brewing Company and Johnson Brothers, who said it would align tax treatment with existing categories and reduce confusion, while the Wine Institute and Anheuser-Busch opposed it as a narrow tax break that could reduce revenue and should instead be considered in a broader alcohol tax review. House Bill 808, on construction defect insurance or related protections for state projects, drew comments from DAGS, the State Procurement Office, and the Subcontractors Association, with the latter warning it would make state contracting harder and shrink the contractor base; the chair questioned what recourse the state has when defects appear after a project is completed. House Bill 809, addressing procurement and subcontractor-listing corrections, drew opposition from SPO, DAGS, and the Subcontractors Association, while the General Contractors Association supported it; members debated whether a 24-hour correction window would create abuse or simply allow minor ministerial fixes, and the bill’s sponsor said the goal was to reduce bid protests and procurement discretion. No votes or final committee actions were recorded in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• property at locations where the protests property at locations where the protests against<00:31:
• It would be in grounds for protests.
• our protesters with with our residents. our protesters with with our residents.
• protest and civil unrest. protest and civil unrest.
• <01:20:51.520> and When it comes to peaceful protests and When it comes to peaceful protests

Keywords: 910, house, all

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