Transcript Highlights:

• On net, at a statewide level, that can lead to an increase in emissions when you require additionality
• a needs assessment of textile and producer responsibility or textile and apparel needs that could lead
• Now, that being said, I think there are legitimate concerns that the proposal could lead to a situation
• Setting an arbitrary timeline to ban 6 PPD on innovation and safety—a ban that goes even further in California
• , because California doesn’t even have a ban—does nothing to address affordability.

Bills: HB2436, HB2322, HB2343, HB1420, HB2426, HB2271, HB2215, HB2421, HB2301, HB2296

Keywords: oil tanker, tank vessel, restricted waters, Puget Sound, San Juan Islands, Rosario Strait, Admiralty Inlet, Discovery Island, New Dungeness, tug escort, pilotage, marine safety, spill prevention, oil transport, petroleum shipment, coast guard authorization, Board of Pilotage Commissioners, articulated tug barge, bunker vessel, refueling vessel

Transcript Highlights:

• a ban on kratom.
• You banned alcohol—what happened? You ban gambling, same thing.
• And a ban will do more harm than good for our community. I do not support a ban.
• And a ban will do more harm than good for our community. I do not support a ban.
• Why should we be banning those?'

Keywords: 989, all

Summary: The committee continued testimony on House Bill 864, which would schedule kratom as a Schedule I substance. Testimony was sharply divided. Supporters included family members of people who died after using kratom, police representatives, a physician who said kratom is an addictive opioid-like substance, and the bill sponsors, who argued that kratom and related compounds can cause addiction, withdrawal, overdose, and death and that a ban is needed to protect public health. Opponents included convenience store and kratom industry representatives, a veteran and other users who said kratom helped them manage pain or avoid opioids, and the American Kratom Association, which argued that the bill conflates natural kratom leaf with synthetic derivatives such as 7-OH and that regulation, not prohibition, is the better approach. The committee ultimately adopted a motion to hold HB 864 to a time certain of March 25 by a roll call vote of 11-5. The committee then took up House Bill 903, a SNAP-related bill clarifying which food items can be purchased with benefits. The sponsor explained that the bill was intended to clean up the earlier SNAP waiver language and remove items such as cookies, cakes, brownies, sprinkles, chips, and snack bars from the list of allowable purchases, while keeping more nutritious items and certain bars. Retailers testified in support, saying the changes would reduce confusion and improve consistency. After discussion over the process and the proposed changes, a motion to hold the bill failed, and the committee voted to send HB 903 to the floor with a due pass recommendation. The final item introduced was House Bill 757, which the sponsor said would define medical neglect in Idaho law and create protections for parents and guardians from false or bad-faith reports. The bill would narrow medical neglect to life-threatening conditions and include exemptions for reasonable efforts to obtain care, medically complex situations, and alternative treatments. No action was taken on HB 757 in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> it</c><00:15:31.360><c> in</c> The executive order banning it in The executive order banning it
• bans trans health care.
• </c><00:37:59.280><c> medical</c> condemned by leading medical condemned by leading medical organizations
• </c><00:38:34.320><c> on</c> poverty law attorney that bans on poverty law attorney that bans on Medicaid
• Passing this bill will lead to litigation.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up administrative regulations, found no concerns, and then passed House Bill 389 with a favorable expression by a 9-0 vote. HB 389 was described as a cleanup bill for the CASPER prescription monitoring program: it clarifies that practitioners must have active CASPER accounts, exempts charitable health care providers from e-prescribing requirements, allows sharing CASPER data with certain federal entities such as military-base providers, and updates references to hydrocodone’s Schedule II status. The sponsor said there was no expected fiscal impact. The committee then passed House Bill 392, also by a 9-0 favorable expression. HB 392 would streamline payment for non-elective medical care for patients in state mental facilities when the facility cannot provide the needed treatment, allowing care in community-based settings and payment to those providers. The sponsor said the bill was intended to improve efficiency and would not have a fiscal impact on the cabinet. House Bill 501 was next and likewise passed 9-0 with favorable expression. The bill would allow pharmacists, in their professional judgment, to refill certain prescriptions for up to 180 days when a physician has died, while excluding controlled substances and preserving pharmacist discretion to require follow-up care. Senators raised concerns that the bill does not require patients to seek a new provider during that period, but supporters said the longer window addresses rural provider shortages and access delays. The committee then heard House Bill 495, as amended by a committee substitute. The substitute would prohibit Medicaid services and managed care organizations from covering cross-sex hormones above normal levels and gender reassignment surgery. Testimony on the bill was overwhelmingly opposed, with speakers including a former senator, psychologists, advocates, and legal and social work representatives arguing that conversion therapy is harmful, that the substitute would deny medically necessary gender-affirming care, and that the measure could increase suicide risk and litigation. One witness from the Family Foundation of Kentucky spoke in favor, arguing the executive order on counseling limits free speech and that counseling should not be restricted by government. The transcript ends during testimony, with no final committee vote on HB 495 shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><04:31:28.080><c> lead</c> New Hampshire, and Vermont banned lead New Hampshire, and Vermont banned
• :32.880><c> to</c> California banned lead ammunition to California banned lead ammunition to protect<
• We must reject this bill, and often claim that banning lead will price often claim that banning lead
• c> tackle</c> already banned lead ammunition or tackle already banned lead ammunition or tackle in<04
• </c><04:54:43.120><c> I</c> proposes to ban the use of lead. I proposes to ban the use of lead.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Wednesday, March 18, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the state of Hawaii.
• Tobacco remains the leading cause of death in our state, the leading preventable cause of death.
• Tobacco remains the leading cause of death in our state, the leading preventable cause of death.
• cause of death in our state leading cause of death in our state leading<01:06:23.720><c> preventable
• Banning flavor waves in Hawaii by preemption can cause more harm, and we have seen it before.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Consumer Protection and Commerce met on January 29, 2025, and heard testimony on HB 108, which concerns intoxicating liquor and would expand direct-to-consumer shipping for beer and spirits. Supporters included representatives of Koloa Rum Company, Maui Brewing Company, and Ola Brew, who argued the bill would modernize alcohol laws, help small local producers compete, support jobs and local agriculture, and give consumers more access to Hawaii-made products. They also said Hawaii already has experience regulating direct wine shipments, with age verification and carrier-based delivery systems in place, and that direct shipping could help businesses reach visitors after they return home and diversify beyond tourism. Opposition came from the Hawaii Public Health Institute, whose representative said the bill could increase access for underage drinking, especially because liquor commissions do not currently conduct compliance checks on alcohol shipments and may lack capacity to do so. The group also raised tax-enforcement concerns, saying the existing three-tier system makes excise and sales tax collection easier, while direct shipping would require additional auditing. They urged the committee to oppose the bill or defer it until more research is done, and suggested a common carrier reporting requirement to help reconcile shipments. Committee members questioned both sides about whether current law already allows some alcohol shipments, whether a Kentucky distiller could ship directly to Hawaii, and how reciprocity with other states would work. Supporters said the bill is modeled on wine-shipping language and could be amended to clarify reciprocity, while opponents said the bill lacks a common carrier reporting requirement and would place a burden on county liquor commissions. No vote or final action on HB 108 was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Disruptive conduct may lead to the removal of those engaging in the behaviors.
• > on</c> Unlike a statutory ban on Unlike a statutory ban on discrimination,<00:21:36.160><c> a</c><00
• </c><00:53:33.880><c> under</c> classifications is already banned under classifications is already banned
• </c><01:41:24.680><c> trans</c><01:41:25.040><c> girls</c> ban, if the legislature bans trans girls ban
• </c> uh leading that charge. uh leading that charge.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Any lead witnesses?
• Just two witnesses to speak as lead opposition. Opposition?
• We will have two witnesses to speak in lead opposition.
• Okay, the ban is what would be the first in the nation in that if at any point, because— A forcible ban
• I want to ask the author again, what is your concern with the ban?

Summary: The Senate Committee on Health heard a series of bills focused on access to care, insurance coverage, and public health. AB 387 on youth sports AED access drew support from the author and safety advocates, but opposition from school, park, city, and county groups over liability, cost, and access concerns. The author said he would continue working on amendments to shift the bill toward requiring access to existing AEDs rather than mandating facility procurement. Committee members emphasized the life-saving purpose of the bill while also raising affordability and access concerns for youth sports programs. The committee also heard AB 1682, which would require health plans and insurers to cover FDA-cleared scalp cooling devices for chemotherapy patients. Supporters, including breast cancer survivors and health groups, described the emotional and quality-of-life benefits of preventing hair loss and said cost is the main barrier to access. There was no formal opposition, though one senator raised concerns about whether the mandate could exceed essential health benefits. The chair and members expressed support for the bill’s goals and said it would be taken up when quorum was established. AB 2093, a follow-up to the 988 crisis line law, sought to clarify statewide leadership, improve coordination among 988, 911, and mobile crisis teams, and create a more sustainable funding structure. Behavioral health organizations and crisis center representatives supported the bill, saying implementation challenges and demand growth require statutory fixes. Committee members generally supported the concept but noted the bill was a gut-and-amend and that additional work was needed with county and behavioral health stakeholders. The committee then heard AB 1843 on hepatitis C treatment, AB 1629 on dental assignment of benefits, AB 2540 on community college access to medication abortion services, and AB 1929 on disclosure of health plan investments. AB 1843 had broad support from medical and public health groups but opposition from health plans, which argued it conflicted with the prior-authorization framework in SB 306 and could raise drug costs. AB 1629 was supported by dental and patient advocates but opposed by dental plans and insurers over concerns about network participation and out-of-pocket costs. AB 2540 drew strong support from reproductive health advocates and student representatives, while community college health services and some others opposed or were neutral pending amendments; the author said the bill was about equity and accepted amendments to reduce burdens. AB 1929 was backed by labor and immigrant rights groups as a transparency measure, but opposed by health plans and insurers who said Covered California was not the right entity to administer the disclosures and that the information was already publicly available. Throughout the hearing, members repeatedly weighed public access and transparency against cost, administrative burden, and implementation concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> permit and so that absolutely could lead permit and so that absolutely could lead to<00:34:26.359
• </c> think the important thing is with a ban think the important thing is with a ban on<03:02:14.399>
• Banning wildlife killing contests does not mean banning hunting.
• ><03:26:59.120><c> I</c> contest does not mean Banning hunting I contest does not mean Banning hunting
• Vermont, as has been said by other testimony, banned coyote contests in 2018, and Massachusetts banned

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Stillman, and it concerns what is known as the in-office lobbying ban.
• The in-office lobbying ban was one of many ethics reforms packaged as Amendment 12, which was proposed
• The in-office lobbying ban is important because it prohibits specified public officers from lobbying
• lobbying ban or the six-year ban.
• So the challenge in court no longer addresses the six-year ban. Thank you.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Ethics and Elections convened, established a quorum, and members introduced themselves and the committee staff. Chair Gaetz outlined the committee’s jurisdiction over election law, ethics law, executive appointments, and related confirmations, and described the committee’s process for handling gubernatorial nominations and member concerns about nominees. The committee then received a briefing from the Florida Commission on Ethics on its 2025 legislative priorities and on implementation of Senate Bill 7014 from the prior year. The commission recommended three changes: expanding the definition of “relative” in the gift law to include current and former foster parents and foster children; authorizing salary withholding to help collect civil penalties and restitution; and adding whistleblower-like protections for people who file ethics complaints. Commission staff also explained how SB 7014 changed complaint processing by requiring allegations to be based on personal knowledge or non-hearsay information and by imposing new deadlines for legal sufficiency review, investigations, and advocates’ recommendations. They said the commission has adapted its intake and review process and is currently meeting the new timelines, though the tighter deadlines may create staffing and scheduling challenges. Commission counsel also provided an update on two active lawsuits. One challenges the constitutional in-office lobbying ban, and the other challenges the requirement that elected municipal officers and mayors file Form 6 financial disclosure forms. The committee discussed the impact of the new complaint standards, the possibility of litigation if deadlines are missed, and whether local ethics boards are implementing SB 7014 similarly. Members expressed support for the commission’s work and asked for written legislative recommendations and proposed statutory language. No votes were taken, and the meeting ended with a motion to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're not going to ban... anything. That is not what we do here.
• in other countries, it's banned in one. but only for, I think it is infant's milk.
• So more so it's a labeling bill instead of a banning bill. Okay.
• and all these ingredients banned in other countries, they just have to labor.
• It removes carrageen because one, it's not banned.

Bills: SJR18, SCR9, SCR13, SB10, SB11, SB19, SB20, SB25, SB62, SB260, SB263, SB293, SB314, SB384, SB412, SB441, SB442, SB494, SB523, SB569, SB616, SB688, SB707, SB766, SB842, SB869, SB890, SB914, SB929, SB971, SB992, SB1066, SB1145, SB1621, SJR36, SJR18, SCR9, SCR13, SB616, SB565, SB384, SB372, SB495, SB842, SB971, SB1066, SB929, SB765, SB523, SB62, SB19, SB18, SB666, SB688, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB706, SB847, SB869, SB890, SB992, SB1145, SB494, SB290, SB766, SB11, SB10, SB13, SB263, SB412, SB20, SB441, SB442, SB1621, SB569, SB314, SB25, SB293, SB914, SB260, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SB1006, SB20, SB25, SB260, SB293, SB314, SB384, SB442, SB494, SB616, SB869, SB890, SB929, SB992, SB1145, SB1621, SR232, SR237, SR242, SB16, SB22

Keywords: capital gains, taxation, constitutional amendment, state revenue, individual investment, Supreme Court, judicial independence, Keep Nine, checks and balances, water rights, treaty compliance, Rio Grande, agriculture, drought, international water, Texas water supply, education, Ten Commandments, public schools, religious display

Transcript Highlights:

• Second issue, banning in-state tuition for illegal aliens. 7 bills have been filed in the Texas House
• loopholes that will ensure that illegal aliens continue receiving tuition discounts even after the ban
• We tried to ban drag shows targeted at children in public libraries.
• Ban the transitioning of our children, the social transitioning of our children.
• Then we have SB 19, which goes hand in hand and bans taxpayer-funded lobbying.

Transcript Highlights:

• But in the years leading up to the Dobbs decision that overturned Roe v.
• I could see why you lead the MNA, the Nurses Association.
• As President Murphy had mentioned, it bans captive audience meetings.
• To be clear, banning strikes does not mean that strikes do not happen.
• The ban means unreasonable penalties and fines, not the lack of strikes.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused on employment rights legislation, especially the Protect Labor Act (H. 2086/S. 1327), which would create state-level labor protections if federal private-sector labor law is weakened or struck down, and would also add protections such as bans on captive audience meetings, virtual elections, stronger misclassification rules, and protections for health care workers and immigrant workers. Supporters from the AFL-CIO, nurses, SEIU, UAW, building trades, teachers, graduate workers, and policy groups argued that the bill is needed because of Trump administration actions, Project 2025, and threats to the NLRA and NLRB. They described the bill as a “trigger” law meant to preserve organizing and bargaining rights in Massachusetts if federal protections disappear or if the NLRB declines jurisdiction over certain workers. The committee also heard testimony on bills to restore a limited right to strike for certain public employees (H. 2078/S. 1311 or related filings). Supporters, including a representative, educators, and labor advocates, said the current ban on public employee strikes weakens good-faith bargaining and leaves workers without leverage to secure wages, staffing, and student supports. They argued that strikes are used as a last resort and that legalizing them under defined conditions would improve negotiations and better reflect the realities of recent teacher strikes in Massachusetts. The Massachusetts Municipal Association opposed the strike bills, warning that public employee strikes are already prohibited by state law, that strikes disrupt students and communities, and that local governments face budget constraints under Proposition 2 1/2. The committee also took testimony on paid family and medical leave bills (S. 1351/H. 2110 and S. 1352), which would improve notice to workers, expand public reporting on claim denials and demographics, and fix a technical definition issue that has limited access for some covered contract workers. Witnesses from legal aid, policy organizations, and a small business owner said the changes would improve transparency, equity, and access to benefits without imposing major burdens on employers. Additional testimony supported a railroad sick leave bill and a private construction transparency bill, with Senator Keenan urging favorable action on both. No votes were taken during the hearing; members asked questions, and several witnesses and legislators requested favorable reports on the bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's an incredibly cruel and unethical practice that we are looking to ban.
• H. 1914, An Act Relative to a Temporary Possession Ban of Animals for Animal Abusers.
• Please also allow for Massachusetts to lead by example.
• States like Massachusetts— States like Massachusetts must lead the way.
• moral and help our state lead with compassion, wisdom, and moral courage.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on the Judiciary held a lengthy public hearing on a wide range of civil actions, labor, consumer protection, and animal welfare bills. Chair Lydia Edwards and Representative Michael Day opened with strict testimony rules and time limits, then heard from legislators and advocates on measures including animal-abuser pet ownership bans (S. 1207/H. 1914), a name-change privacy bill (S. 1045/H. 1973), tort claims reform (H. 1724), law enforcement council coverage under the Tort Claims Act (S. 1199), civil rights and qualified immunity-related proposals (H. 1641), employee free speech/captive audience restrictions (S. 1078/H. 1653), consumer protection and civil rights jurisdiction expansion (S. 1041), private right of action for wage theft (H. 1916), gun-owner liability insurance (H. 1836), pseudoephedrine sales tracking (S. 1243/H. 1581), prepaid legal services plans (H. 1612), structured settlement protections (H. 1863), third-party litigation financing disclosure (H. 1861), antitrust reform for small businesses and workers (S. 1038/H. 1982), legal notices in online-only newspapers (S. 1279/H. 1632), and several animal cruelty and protection bills including H. 1938, H. 1949, S. 1277/H. 1934, and H. 1764. Testimony was largely supportive from bill sponsors and advocacy groups, with repeated themes of protecting vulnerable people and animals, improving access to justice, and updating outdated laws. Supporters of the animal bills argued for stronger possession bans, broader cruelty citations, and civil removal tools to prevent repeat abuse; opponents or conditional supporters raised due process and enforcement concerns, especially around warrantless seizures and requiring retail or shelter staff to check registries. On the labor and consumer side, supporters said the antitrust bill would curb monopoly power and help small businesses and workers, while opponents warned it could destabilize competition and burden successful firms. The employee free speech bill was backed as a response to captive audience meetings, and the wage-theft bill was presented as a way to let workers or organizations pursue claims when individual employees are afraid to come forward. Several public officials and association representatives testified on the law enforcement and civil rights bills. Chiefs of police supported adding law enforcement councils to the Tort Claims Act, saying it would close a liability gap for regional mutual-aid collaborations. But police representatives opposed changes to the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act and qualified immunity-related provisions, arguing the federal system already provides a workable forum and that expanding liability could increase costs, reduce morale, and worsen recruitment and retention. On the consumer/civil rights bill, Senator Collins and a veteran described an out-of-state assault case that they said showed the need for Massachusetts to let residents seek redress at home when rights are violated elsewhere. No votes or formal committee actions were taken during the hearing itself; the committee mainly received testimony and questions. Several witnesses indicated they had submitted written testimony or proposed amendments, and some bills drew requests for favorable reports while others were explicitly opposed unless amended.

Transcript Highlights:

• All prior state legislation banning PFOS in products bans PFAS as a class.
• All prior state legislation banning PFOS in products bans PFAS as a class.
• The state has banned PFOS in food packaging, but nothing when it comes to PFOS pesticides used on crops
• We believe decisions about future products should be based on science rather than a categorical ban.
• The bill does not ban any chemicals.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And that leads to fragmented care.
• That leads to the gaps that we're seeing and the repeated hospital... ...that leads to fragmented care
• In fact, that's one of the leading causes of recall elections.
• You would suggest both those unsolicited offers should be banned?
• You would suggest both those unsolicited offers should be banned?

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• that such funds may also support technology solutions tied to developing new courses or new programs leading
• Schools with districts leading on the policy with their own preferred preferences.
• This has to be banned and bell-to-bell.
• Okay, so thank you all for your testimony, because this has to be banned, bell to bell.
• It's destroying kids at school, and it's got to be banned. Thank you.

Bills: HB322, HB126, HB3062, HB1481, HB2310, HB2674, HB121, HB2243, HB3627, HB1178, HB367, HB5515, HB126, HB121

Keywords: JET Grant Program, career education, technical education, community colleges, technology solutions, high demand jobs, student athletes, name image likeness, compensation, intercollegiate athletics, representation, fentanyl prevention, drug poisoning awareness, higher education, mental health resources, substance abuse education, student policy, communication devices, school regulations, disciplinary measures

Transcript Highlights:

• They've gone and actually banned two of the chemicals that are in this bill.
• We're trying to ban things that are causing serious health issues.
• "California has banned four. Effective..." "Thank you. California has banned four.
• And this does not ban these..." "...dangerous chemicals from being in our food.
• And this does not ban these chemicals from being produced or being sold.

Summary: The Committee on Agriculture met with a quorum present and took up four bills. First, CS/SB 150, “Trooper’s Law,” by Senator Gates, would make it a third-degree felony to abandon or restrain an animal during a declared weather emergency, such as a hurricane or tornado. The bill was presented as a response to a widely publicized case of a dog tied to a fence during Hurricane Milton. Several speakers supported the measure, and the committee voted unanimously to report it favorably. Next, SB 374 by Senator Trunow would refine the definition of “farm product” to include plant and plant products and bar local governments from restricting the collection, storage, and processing of farm products on bona fide agricultural land. An amendment related to food waste was withdrawn for further discussion, and public testimony came from composting, recycling, and poultry interests in support. The bill was then reported favorably. The committee also heard SB 560 by Senator Martin on chemical additives in food products, which would restrict a list of 10 chemicals in food. The sponsor argued the bill was aimed at serious health concerns and noted some chemicals had already been banned federally; industry and retail witnesses opposed the bill as creating a patchwork of state rules and potential market disruptions, while some senators supported the health goal but raised concerns about consistency. The committee voted to report SB 560 favorably, with one recorded no vote. Finally, SB 572, the Pam Rock Act by Senator Collins, would create a statewide dangerous dog registry and impose additional criminal penalties, permitting requirements, microchipping, sterilization, and insurance requirements for dangerous dogs. The sponsor and family members of attack victims described severe injuries and deaths to support the need for public notice and accountability. Some members questioned the usefulness of a registry and the burden of the information requirements, but the sponsor said the bill was intended to prevent repeat attacks and help victims. The committee voted to report SB 572 favorably. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> So I I wonder, does this bill ban So I I wonder, does this bill ban trained<00:29:06.320><c> offduty
• Uh does it<00:29:12.240><c> ban</c> it ban it ban uh<00:29:14.399><c> faculty</c><00:29:14.960><c> who
• Does this ban a completely cleared?
• It's like you walk up to a venue and you can see this premises ban guns.
• There are people this premises ban guns.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The second issue is banning in-state tuition for illegal aliens.
• We will be fighting to shrink this bill back to an actual ban and to get it to the floor for a vote.
• In the 88th session, we finally banned the gender mutilation of kids, but...
• Last session, we tried to ban drag shows targeted at children in public libraries.
• Then we have Senate Bill 19, which goes hand-in-hand and bans taxpayer-funded lobbying.

Keywords: immigration, children's rights, E-Verify, social transitioning, election integrity, Texas GOP, legislative session, urgent legislation

Summary: The committee meeting was characterized by fervent discussions surrounding critical legislation, particularly regarding immigration, children's rights, and election integrity. Key bills such as HB2258, aiming to ban social transitioning for children, and E-Verify legislation were highlighted as urgent priorities. Several representatives expressed frustration over stalled bills and emphasized the necessity of decisive action to fulfill their commitments made during their campaigns. The urgency was marked by the approaching deadline for bill passage, with only days remaining in the legislative session. Members urged House leadership to prioritize these bills, warning that failure to act would undermine public trust in their capacity to fulfill the Republicans' campaign promises.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill does not ban technology.
• SB 937 will also ban the use of flashbangs and... ...publicly reported within 60 days.
• Masking bans do not interfere with law enforcement operations.
• But we'll follow the Senator's lead on their discussion. Sure.
• This is not an outright ban. It is a 10-year moratorium. This is not an outright ban.

Summary: The committee heard several public safety bills and took testimony on each, with members often noting amendments and continuing negotiations. SB 1009 by Senator Becker would require juvenile courts to find that less restrictive alternatives are unsuitable before ordering detention, and would require periodic review of continued detention and consideration of alternatives at disposition. Supporters argued it would reduce unnecessary youth detention and improve transparency; probation, judges, and police groups opposed it as an undue limit on judicial discretion and potentially unsafe in serious cases. The chair said he would recommend an aye with amendments, but the bill was held pending quorum and later remained on call. SB 1130 by Senator Gomez Reyes would update privacy law for wearable recording devices such as smart glasses, requiring consent before recording in places where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy and banning devices or accessories designed to defeat recording indicators. Supporters said the bill addresses secret recording and invasive surveillance; opponents from tech and hospitality groups sought clarification to avoid unintended liability for businesses and exempt workplace communication devices. Members discussed those exemptions, and the chair recommended an aye, but the measure also remained on call. Senator Blake Spear presented SB 99, which would let courts consider military protective orders in domestic violence proceedings and require better communication between civilian law enforcement and military authorities. Supporters from the Department of Defense, local officials, and military representatives said it would close protection gaps for military families; the ACLU opposed it on due process grounds because MPOs are issued without judicial process. The chair and author emphasized that the bill only allows consideration of MPOs and does not require civilian enforcement of them. The bill passed out on a vote, though it remained on call for additional members. The committee also heard SB 937 by Senator Gonzalez, restricting flashbang use for crowd control and banning flashbangs and explosive breaching charges in immigration enforcement, and SB 1022, creating a statewide anti-trafficking task force. SB 937 drew support from civil rights and community groups and opposition from police and sheriffs over the use-of-force standard and limits on tactics; it passed out on a vote but remained on call. SB 1022 was supported by survivor and faith groups and opposed by public defenders and sex worker advocates who raised concerns about racial disparities and enforcement harms; it also passed out on a vote. Later, SB 1395, extending criminal protective orders for certain felony sex offenses against minors up to 20 years, and SB 1230, increasing penalties for repeat illegal dumping, were both heard with mixed testimony and were held on call after committee votes. The committee also adopted a consent calendar and several bills were moved forward with amendments.