Transcript Highlights:

• I have been in practice full-time as a forensic pathologist for about 29 years now.
• This is something that a well-trained, board-certified forensic pathologist can look at.

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 2777 by Representative Rose, which would bar the death penalty for defendants who can prove by clear and convincing evidence that they had schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and active psychotic symptoms at the time of the offense. Rose said the bill would still hold defendants accountable through life without parole, would save money by avoiding lengthy capital litigation, and would address cases where severe mental illness was not adequately considered. Supporters from NAMI Texas, the Catholic bishops, and a forensic psychologist said the bill is narrowly tailored, consistent with neuroscience and moral principles, and would prevent executions of people whose psychosis substantially impaired reality testing. Committee members questioned how the bill interacts with existing competency and insanity law, whether the diagnosis is sufficiently defined, and whether the statute requires active psychosis at the time of the offense. An opponent argued the death penalty should remain available for juries to decide in all cases. The bill was left pending. The committee then heard House Bill 1221 by Representative Lozano, which would raise the cap on pretrial intervention program fees from $500 to $1,200. Lozano and a district attorney witness said the increase is needed because program costs have risen and the fees help make diversion programs self-sustaining, allowing first-time or low-level offenders to complete rehabilitation and potentially obtain expunction. Opponents from the Texas Fair Defense Project argued the higher fee could make diversion unaffordable for indigent defendants and undermine an important alternative to incarceration, especially where related supervision and monitoring costs already add up. Members discussed whether the fee applies only to PTI participants, how payment plans and waivers work, and whether ability to pay should be addressed more explicitly. The bill was left pending. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 1738 by Representative Jones, which would repeal Penal Code Section 21.06 and related Health and Safety Code references concerning homosexual conduct. Jones said the law is unconstitutional under Lawrence v. Texas, remains harmful on the books, and has led to confusion and unnecessary costs even though it is unenforceable. Supporters said the bill simply removes outdated language and protects civil liberties, while opponents from Texas Values argued the statute still serves as a statement that homosexual conduct is unacceptable and should remain as a warning, even if unenforceable. Members debated whether the law’s remaining language is merely symbolic or still harmful, and whether other criminal statutes already cover conduct such as prostitution, incest, and offenses involving minors. The bill was left pending after testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• That group consists of fish health pathologists from across the U.S.
• that group consists of the fish section that group consists of the fish health<00:31:13.639> pathologist
• c> from<00:31:14.519> across<00:31:14.840> the<00:31:15.000> US health pathologist
• from across the US health pathologist from across the US the<00:31:16.039> AFS<00:31:16.480><

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, um, my question is: I'm a speech language pathologist, and I was a little bit surprised.
• Um, I've been licensed in other states when I moved here that your speech paths are not really trained
• they So, I will mention that we are expanding the supports for professional learning, and those speech

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• structures still exist, the government is steadily eroding our rights, including due process, freedom of speech
• but we have concerns around the constitutionality and how this could potentially chill protected speech

Bills: HB1838, HB1870, HB2445, HB2540, HB1886, HB1839, HB2269, HB1939, HB2037, HB1635, HB1941, HB1576, HB2568, HB2267, HB2590, HB2266, HB2597, HB2499, HB2500, HB2502, HB2607, HB2137, HB2357, HB1782

Keywords: HB1838, Hawaii, Act 142, U visa, T visa, U nonimmigrant status, T nonimmigrant status, immigration certification, visa certification, Form I-918 Supplement B, Form I-914 Supplement B, noncitizen victims, crime victim, human trafficking, victim helpfulness, law enforcement certification, prosecutor certification, judicial review, circuit court, confidentiality

Summary: The committee opened testimony on House Bill 1838, relating to visas. Testifiers from the State Health Planning and Development Agency, the legal clinic, the Hawaii State Coalition Against Domestic Violence, the ACLU, CARES, and immigrant-rights groups strongly supported the bill, saying it would bring Hawaii into compliance with federal law, standardize and speed up certification for U and T visa applicants, and better protect survivors of crime and trafficking. Supporters emphasized that delays in certification can leave eligible survivors waiting years for federal visa access and can undermine public safety by discouraging victims from reporting crimes. The chair announced there were 103 testimonies in support and one in opposition, and the committee then moved on without taking a vote on the bill in the hearing. The committee next heard House Bill 1870, concerning protected locations and immigration enforcement. Testimony from the Hawaii Coalition for Immigrant Rights, ACLU of Hawaii, educators, students, and community advocates supported limiting immigration enforcement at schools and other essential-service sites, arguing that families should be able to access education, health care, shelters, libraries, and social services without fear. The Department of Education said it had already issued guidance in March 2025 for how staff should respond when law enforcement comes onto campus, and the Public Charter School Commission noted implementation would need to occur at the school level. Testifiers said the bill would create standardized protocols and protect students and families from fear and disruption; the chair reported 142 testimonies in support, one in opposition, and five comments. The committee then took up House Bill 2445, relating to student safety and law enforcement on campus. The Department of Education again said it had already rolled out statewide guidance and described its process for staff to notify administration, verify law enforcement identification and purpose, and route matters through the complex area superintendent and attorney general, while noting emergencies would be handled differently. A committee member questioned whether the procedures were sufficiently standardized and whether staff were trained for unusual situations. Student and community testifiers supported the bill, saying schools should remain safe havens and that clear procedures are needed if federal immigration enforcement appears on campus. The Department of Law Enforcement testified in opposition to parts of the measure, raising concerns about masking requirements, vehicle markings, officer safety, doxxing, retaliation, costs, and possible supremacy-clause conflicts, and suggested more exemptions and a compromise approach. The chair reported 106 testimonies in support, two comments, and no opposition for the bill before moving on to the next measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am a bilingual speech-language pathologist in the Hopkins School District and the Early Intervention

Bills: HF2296, HF1566, HF1854, HF1385, HF1142

Keywords: landlord-tenant, victim confidentiality, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, tenant privacy, housing law, eviction, unpaid rent, damages, release of information, shared database, protective order, victim of violence, Minnesota Statutes 504B.206, housing finance, civil law, autism, rental properties, reasonable accommodation

Transcript Highlights:

• Page 37 is speech-language pathologists.
• Page<03:49:46.479> 37<03:49:47.279> speech<03:49:47.760> language<03:49:48.160><
• c> pathologists.

Keywords: 916, all

Bills: HB2118, HB1764, HB1815, HB2117, HB2436, HB2438, HB2532, HB2566, HB2573, HB1736, HB2425, HB1590, HB1913, HB1573, HB1542, HB1804, HB1976, HB1704, HB1996, HB1541, HB1926, HB1703, HB1866, HB1710

Keywords: business development, arts, cultural affairs, Hawaii, commissions, administrative transfer, funding appropriation, music education, public concerts, Hawaii State Library, cultural collaboration, music accessibility, State Foundation on Culture and the Arts, SFCA, Performing Arts Grants Program, arts grants, culture and the arts, history and the humanities, King Kamehameha Celebration Commission, Works of Art Special Fund

Bills: HB2118, HB1764, HB1815, HB2117, HB2436, HB2438, HB2532, HB2566, HB2573, HB1736, HB2425, HB1590, HB1913, HB1573, HB1542, HB1804, HB1976, HB1704, HB1996, HB1541, HB1926, HB1703, HB1866, HB1710

Keywords: business development, arts, cultural affairs, Hawaii, commissions, administrative transfer, funding appropriation, music education, public concerts, Hawaii State Library, cultural collaboration, music accessibility, State Foundation on Culture and the Arts, SFCA, Performing Arts Grants Program, arts grants, culture and the arts, history and the humanities, King Kamehameha Celebration Commission, Works of Art Special Fund

Transcript Highlights:

• Does this law, this piece of legislation, compel speech? No.
• Representative Owen asks whether the bill criminalizes speech. The response is no.
• The question is whether it criminalizes speech; the answer given is no. Thank you, Mr.
• Oregon's law, a notification law that's very similar to this, they talked about the chilling of private speech
• So when you're talking about private speech within our current technological environment, where someone

Bills: HR115, HR116, HR117, HR118, HR112, HR113, HR114, HCR51, HCR52, SCR18, SCR20, SB14, SB76, SB118, SB142, SB156, SB170, SB197, SB234, SB258, SB287, SB288, SB313, SB315, SB393, SB396, SB426, SB427, HCR7, HB76, HB84, HB132, HB181, HB210, HB250, HB265, HB275, HB291, HB322, HB342, HB457, HB475, HB477, HB486, HB616, HB635, HB639, HB690, HB740, HB757, HB761, HB766, HB774, HB808, HB855, HB866, HB872, HB883, HB886, HB903, HB949, HB962, HB996, HB1003, HB1036, HB1054, HB1071, HB1076, HB1078, HB1113, HB1132, HB1146, HB1232, HB1233, HR15, HR20, HCR14, HCR6, HCR19, HCR10, HR74, HCR26, HCR35, HB98, HB108, HB131, HB151, HB161, HB288, HB294, HB305, HB310, HB320, HB336, HB380, HB392, HB403, HB420, HB459, HB476, HB540, HB615, HB631, HB637, HB648, HB665, HB682, HB789, HB813, HB815, HB835, HB870, HB905, HB915, HB933, HB938, HB987, HB1040, HB51, HB82, HB143, HB145, HB160, HB180, HB192, HB393, HB430, HB445, HB506, HB515, HB521, HB565, HB590, HB614, HB638, HB670, HB672, HB685, HB692, HB752, HB773, HB781, HB799, HB860, HB874, HB887, HB917, HB937, HB956, HB965, HB972, HB977, HB982, HB1006, HB1010, HB1044, HB1072, HB1088, HB1179, HB1200, HB81, HB400, HB154, HB410, HB463, HB827, HB868, HB952, HB953, HB140, HB750, HB911, HB52, HB961, HB399, HB401, HB901, HB9, HB58, HB193, HB284, HB570, HB577, HB582, HB605, HB733

Keywords: Kappa Alpha Psi, fraternity, Louisiana, commemoration, community engagement, recognition, state championship, basketball, sports achievement, school commendation, commendation, athletics, team sports, youth, community recognition, water utility, tax credit, excessive rates, residential service, subcommittee

Transcript Highlights:

• We are, but I would add also, and certainly I'm not a pathologist, but there also is a challenge in detecting

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:18:43.520> uh speech includes uh hateful speech uh speech includes uh hateful speech uh
• Discussions around how and when speech may be regulated—from commercial speech, obscenity, and speech
• I’m also a free speech purist.
• speech regulated from commercial speech regulated from commercial speech obscenity<00:25:09.320
• speech using speech suspicion using hate speech using speech suspicion of<00:35:55.800> using

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:

• [No audible speech; stray vocalization.] [No audible speech; stray vocalization.]
• [No audible speech; stray vocalization.] [No audible speech; stray vocalization.]
• [No audible speech; stray vocalization.] [No audible speech; stray vocalization.]
• [No audible speech; stray vocalization.] [No audible speech; stray vocalization.]
• [No audible speech; stray vocalization.] [No audible speech; stray vocalization.]

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.]
• [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.]
• [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.]
• [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.]
• [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.]

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Tuesday, January 21, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• speech.
• As it relates to hate speech, how does the university deal with hate speech there?
• Free speech, which I think many times can hide, as I said initially, hate speech.
• Obviously we know hate speech is protected free speech under the Constitution.
• That's hate speech to me.

Summary: The joint Senate and House Select Committee on Civil Discourse and Freedom of Speech in Higher Education convened for its first public hearing, adopted its proposed rules without objection, and framed the hearing as an organizational, invited-testimony-only session. Members repeatedly condemned political violence and the assassination of Charlie Kirk, saying the committee was created in response to concerns about civil discourse, intimidation, and hostility on college campuses. Several members emphasized that the goal was not to suppress speech but to protect open expression while maintaining order, due process, and institutional accountability. The first witness, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Commissioner Wyn Rosser, outlined implementation of Senate Bill 37. He described the General Education Advisory Committee, which is reviewing broad core-curriculum knowledge and skills and may recommend reducing the current 42-hour core, while leaving review of specific courses to individual institutions. He also explained the new Office of the Ombudsman, the board’s role in supporting it, and existing training and certification requirements for governing board members. Members asked about enforcement tools, transparency, and whether the ombudsman would investigate complaints involving censorship, retaliation, or political bias; Rosser said some enforcement exists in certain laws, but he deferred on the exact scope of the ombudsman’s investigatory authority and on issues outside the agency’s role. University of Texas at Austin President Jim Davis testified that UT Austin supports free speech, academic freedom, and civil discourse, and he described three areas of focus: speech on campus grounds, classroom discourse, and how people treat one another. He said the university enforces time, place, and manner rules, expects professors to present alternative views on controversial topics, and has created internal reporting and appeal processes for students and faculty. Members questioned him about heckler’s veto incidents, protests, off-campus participants, complaints about professors, hate speech, and whether the university would protect speakers and students from disruption or unfair targeting. Davis said the university would not tolerate disruptions, would use due process and factual review, and is working to align campus practices with the new law and regents’ expectations. Ricky Adam Jr. of Turning Point USA’s Club America described the group’s campus and high-school organizing, praised Charlie Kirk’s approach to open debate, and said the organization is expanding in Texas. He raised concerns about school administrators and a counselor at an Early College High School in Killeen allegedly interfering with a student club and withholding footage, and committee members said they would seek information and, if necessary, use legislative process to investigate. Members from both chambers reiterated support for free speech, criticized political violence and campus suppression of viewpoints, and stressed that future hearings would continue examining implementation and enforcement issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• As it relates to hate speech, how does the university deal with hate speech?
• speech, free speech.
• Obviously, we know hate speech. speech is protected, free speech, under the Constitution.
• Also hate speech.
• But if it's protected speech. the First Amendment, it is free speech. Is that fair to say?

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.]
• [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.]
• [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.]
• [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.]
• [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.] [No audible speech.]

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Wednesday, January 15, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• [No discernible speech.] [No discernible speech.] [No discernible speech.] [No discernible speech.]
• [No discernible speech.] [No discernible speech.] [No discernible speech.] [No discernible speech.]
• [No discernible speech.] [No discernible speech.] [No discernible speech.] [No discernible speech.]
• [No discernible speech.] [No discernible speech.] [No discernible speech.] [No discernible speech.]
• [No discernible speech.] [No discernible speech.] [No discernible speech.] [No discernible speech.]

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Monday, March 24, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• [Unintelligible / no audible speech captured.] [Unintelligible / no audible speech captured.]
• [Unintelligible / no audible speech captured.] [Unintelligible / no audible speech captured.]
• [Unintelligible / no audible speech captured.] [Unintelligible / no audible speech captured.]
• [Unintelligible / no audible speech captured.] [Unintelligible / no audible speech captured.]
• [Unintelligible / no audible speech captured.] [Unintelligible / no audible speech captured.]

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up a House Bill 2 amendment to remove a bail-related section that had already passed in another bill and was now considered duplicative. Members discussed the earlier change to how bail commissioners are reimbursed, concerns that the Judiciary was losing money collecting the fees, and whether the magistrate-related language would still be needed. They noted the bill had already crossed over to the Senate, that the section was obsolete, and that any remaining issue about magistrates’ five-year terms might need to be raised with the Criminal Justice Committee. Amendment 997H, deleting section one, was moved, seconded, and adopted unanimously. The committee then reviewed a package of HB 1 position transfers involving the Department of Environmental Services, Fish and Game, and the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources. Staff explained that several positions were being shuffled to correct position numbers and align permitting functions, including one Fish and Game position moving back to Fish and Game, one DEES position remaining funded after ARPA money ends, and adjustments to hours for permitting and environmental services positions. Members discussed whether the Fish and Game position had been intended to be temporary, but ultimately agreed to accept the first four Environmental Services items and the last two Natural and Cultural Resources items as a package; that motion passed unanimously. They then also accepted sections 2 through 8 of HB 1 with the related amendments and footnote language. The committee next turned to dredge-and-fill fee changes in section 11, where one member objected to a 50% fee increase for seasonal docks, arguing it could discourage permitted work and might apply to repairs that only require notification. Staff said the increase was intended to help cover the cost of additional positions in future biennia, but members decided to hold that section for more information, including how many seasonal dock repair fees are actually collected. Finally, the committee began discussing HB 215 and a proposed tipping-fee/surcharge structure to make a solid waste accounting unit self-funded, with members saying the fee could offset about $2.9 million in general fund costs and support the grant program, but no final action was taken on that item in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Free speech rights are also good for patients.
• , and we'd his case and that was considered speech.
• for engaging in protected speech.
• Witness: Sir, it doesn't change the definition of speech.
• That type of speech, do we agree?

Bills: SB 240, SB 1183, SB 1184, SB 1577, SB 2043, SB 2051, SCR 42, SJR 68

Keywords: biological sex, gender identity, public facilities, civil penalties, local government, EBT, electronic benefits transfer, food stamps, SNAP, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, TANF, temporary assistance for needy families, welfare benefits, benefit card fraud, fraud hotline, card replacement, photo ID, recipient photograph, HHSC, Health and Human Services Commission

Transcript Highlights:

• [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.]
• [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.]
• [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.]
• [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.]
• [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.] [No audible speech captured.]

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Finance received an informational briefing from the Department of Law Enforcement on its priorities following the January 1 transfer of law enforcement assets into the department, including the sheriff’s division, narcotics enforcement, criminal investigations, homeland security, and the inspector general’s office. DLE said its goals are to improve public safety, accountability, communications, training, and standards. The department outlined planned initiatives such as stronger federal partnerships, narcotics and gun-violence enforcement, an agricultural crime unit, traffic and commercial vehicle enforcement, an explosive/fireworks enforcement section, gun buybacks, new police facilities in the airport area, Aahu, and the leeward side, a state training center, upgraded law-enforcement IT, and efforts to narrow salary gaps with county departments to improve recruitment. A major portion of the discussion focused on illegal fireworks enforcement after the recent explosion tragedy. DLE said its current task force is small and relies on ad hoc support from HPD, the Attorney General’s office, criminal investigations, and sheriffs, which is not sustainable. The department requested eight FTEs for the effort—one administrator, two clerical staff, and six investigators—plus funding for a laboratory, equipment, storage, disposal, vehicles, safety gear, and a criminalist. DLE said the explosive enforcement section would use an existing facility and that the initial lab startup cost is about $2 million. Members asked for follow-up materials, and DLE said it would send the explosive enforcement forms and additional details to the Finance and Judiciary chairs. Members also questioned staffing vacancies, interagency coordination, and whether new specialized units could be filled. DLE said it has about 119 vacancies and that recruitment is hindered by a roughly $28,000 starting pay gap with county police departments; academy classes are down to about 12 to 14 recruits. The department said it is streamlining hiring, using QR-code recruitment, and hopes specialized units will attract applicants. On coordination, DLE said it works closely with HPD and other agencies on operations such as fireworks enforcement and public events, and that DOCARE remains a case-by-case partner but is not currently moving into DLE. The committee also received updates on the Silver Alert program, which is nearing rollout with county MOUs and a coordinator expected later in the month, the special duty officer program, which is being moved to a web-based vendor-managed system at no cost to the department, and the SaferWatch school safety system, which is being deployed statewide with annual software costs of $3,500 per school in the first year and $2,500 thereafter. No votes or formal actions were taken.