Transcript Highlights:

• targeting immigrants.
• Other immigrant rights organizations report similar actions targeting them.
• In 6218.11, you define a designated immigration support services facility.
• You define a designated immigration support services facility as a facility where immigration support
• This essentially applies that to immigration legal services and immigration service organizations and

Summary: The Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee heard several bills focused on consumer transparency, environmental protection, education accountability, and privacy protections. AB 2143 by Assemblymember Irwin would prohibit online marketplaces from accepting payment for noxious weeds shipped into California; supporters said the bill would close an e-commerce loophole that helps spread invasive species, while TechNet opposed it unless clearer standards and safeguards were added. AB 1744 by Assemblymember Addis, the Clear Labels, Clear Seas Act, would bar sunscreen products containing chemical UV filters from being marketed as “reef safe” or similar claims; supporters, including a Sacramento high school eco club and Surfrider Foundation, said the bill would prevent misleading greenwashing, while the Personal Care Products Council expressed concern about implications for the safety of those ingredients. The committee also heard AB 1861 by Assemblymember Lackey, which would require the California Department of Education to maintain a public, searchable database of special education complaint decisions with personal information redacted. Supporters said the bill would improve transparency and help identify patterns of noncompliance affecting students with disabilities, while county education officials argued state resources should instead go toward filling special education vacancies. AB 2624 by Assemblymember Bonta would expand the Safe at Home address confidentiality program to immigrant service providers, employees, and volunteers and restrict online posting of their personal information when intended to threaten or intimidate; supporters described rising harassment, doxing, and threats against immigrant-serving organizations, while Assemblymember DeMaio raised First Amendment and public transparency concerns and Assemblymember Patterson questioned the bill’s limits on protest and publication. Because the committee initially lacked a quorum, several bills were heard and later voted on once quorum was established. Members generally praised the bills and, in some cases, requested to be added as coauthors. When votes were taken, AB 1861, AB 1744, AB 2143, and AB 2624 all passed out of committee, with AB 2624 receiving 11 aye votes and 2 no votes; the others were reported out on unanimous or near-unanimous votes. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• immigrants.
• Other immigrant rights organizations report similar actions targeting them.
• In 6218.11, you define a designated immigration support services facility.
• You define a designated immigration support services facility as a facility where immigration support
• This essentially applies that to immigration legal services and immigration service organizations and

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> with respect to immigration status. with respect to immigration status.
• An immigration process is complicated. An immigration process is complicated.
• </c> immigration or further information. immigration or further information.
• </c> immigrants do now. immigrants do now.
• </c> terms of the immigration process. terms of the immigration process.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Yes. engage in immigration enforcement. engage in immigration enforcement.
• </c> with unauthorized civil immigration with unauthorized civil immigration arrest<00:15:26.280><c>
• </c><00:35:41.359><c> A</c> immigration arrest or detention. A immigration arrest or detention.
• 00:36:08.760><c> or</c> Unauthorized civil immigration arrest or Unauthorized civil immigration arrest
• </c> Yeah, just taking out the immigration. Yeah, just taking out the immigration.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee took up a large decision-making agenda and adopted most measures, often with technical or clarifying amendments. Bills addressed wildlife habitat conservation plans, civil identification cards for 16- and 17-year-olds, electronic and mail voting for associations, remedies for unauthorized disclosure of intimate images, traffic safety around stationary vehicles and pickup truck passengers, expedited permitting for housing for people with disabilities, rainwater catchment systems, EMS advisory committee membership, social media account deletion, limits on immigration-enforcement cooperation, prompt payment rules for professional solicitors, fetal death vital statistics, protections for gender-affirming care, passenger ropeways, law-enforcement facial coverings and immigration-related detention, domestic violence, health care facility access, guardianship record sealing, child protective proceedings, remote driver’s license hearings, disposable vaping products, dog attacks, insurance premium increase explanations, the DOE harm-to-student registry, Hawaiian Homes lease succession, EMS law modernization, hoisting machine regulation, release on recognizance, language interpretation rules, civil asset forfeiture for fireworks offenses, and assisted community treatment. Several bills were deferred, including HB 1897, HB 1957, HB 2121, and HB 2324, while HB 1957 was deferred indefinitely. Most measures were adopted without recorded opposition, though HB 1875 and HB 1961 drew no votes from Vice Chair Gabbard, and HB 2413 was adopted with reservations. A number of bills received substantive amendment instructions. HB 1682 was amended with committee report language noting concerns about departing from the model act. HB 1768 and HB 1886 were revised to narrow or clarify immigration-enforcement restrictions and law-enforcement identification and facial-covering provisions, including plainclothes and undercover exceptions, a narrower civil immigration arrest/detention offense, and savings clauses. HB 2540 received extensive amendments to convert policy language into mandatory terms, refine facial-covering and identification rules, align criminal and policy exemptions, narrow immigration-related offenses, and clarify the definition of law enforcement agency. HB 2413 was amended to define violent offenses, change written findings to oral findings on the record, limit reconsideration of bail, and restrict who may request sanctions or financial conditions. Other amendments included technical fixes, bad-date corrections, severability clauses, and chapter-consistency changes. The committee also heard a joint Education/Judiciary item, SCR 105 and SR 99, urging the Department of Education to provide students information on pre-registering to vote before reaching voting age. Testimony was reported in support from the Department of Education, Office of Elections, Hawaii State Commission on the Status of Women, and the League of Women Voters. With no opposition or further discussion, the committee voted to pass both resolutions with technical, non-substantive amendments (SD1).

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> violating immigration laws. violating immigration laws.
• </c> immigration enforcement. immigration enforcement.
• </c> criminal immigration enforcement. criminal immigration enforcement.
• </c> immigration enforcement. immigration enforcement.
• It is civil immigration<01:34:34.240><c> enforcement</c> immigration enforcement immigration enforcement

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm an immigration<00:29:26.000><c> attorney.</c> immigration attorney. immigration attorney.
• </c> legal immigration status applications. legal immigration status applications.
• </c> process of legal immigration petitions. process of legal immigration petitions.
• </c> immigration policy is workforce policy. immigration policy is workforce policy.
• </c> immigrants are to Minnesota's economy. immigrants are to Minnesota's economy.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Our immigrant community is scared.
• Immigration and Customs Enforcement in the workplace.
• About one in five workers in Washington State are immigrants, and most immigrant families are mixed status
• Immigrants are a vital part of our workforce and our state economy.
• I urge you to support the Immigrant Worker Protection Act.

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 2091, a collective bargaining measure that would require state agencies and other employers covered by the Personnel System Reform Act to provide unions with employee contact and job information similar to what other public employers already must share. The sponsor and union witnesses said the bill would close a gap left by prior legislation and improve communication with represented employees; no one testified in opposition during the hearing portion shown. Action on the bill was deferred. The committee then moved to House Bill 2264, which would allow workers who voluntarily participate in an employer-initiated layoff or reduction-in-force plan to qualify for unemployment insurance if the separation results from that plan. The sponsor and a member described it as a narrow fix to clarify eligibility and reduce disputes. After brief supportive testimony, the committee voted 9-0 to report the bill out with a due pass recommendation. A lengthy hearing followed on House Bill 2218, a workers’ compensation bill that would expand provider choice, require notice to injured workers of their right to choose a provider, limit employer steering, speed utilization review, allow more flexibility from treatment guidelines, and change rules for reopening or continuing treatment on certain claims. Supporters, including injured workers, unions, attorneys, firefighters, and a psychiatrist, argued the current system delays care and over-relies on rigid guidelines; opponents from business groups and the Department of Labor and Industries said the bill would weaken evidence-based standards, raise costs, and create uncertainty. No final action was taken in the portion shown. The committee also heard House Bill 2105, as a proposed substitute, which would require employers to notify workers after an ICE Form I-9 inspection notice or results, limit voluntary access to certain records without a subpoena or warrant, require workplace postings, and create enforcement by the Attorney General and private lawsuits. Supporters said the bill would provide due process, transparency, and protection for immigrant workers; opponents, especially small business and agricultural groups, warned of conflicts with federal law, burdensome notice requirements, and severe penalties. The hearing continued with additional testimony, and no vote was taken in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The department is also hearing that many immigrants are fearful to pursue affirmative immigration benefits
• The One California and CDSS's immigration programs provide community outreach to And CDSS's immigration
• Holistic Immigration Representation Project, or CHIRP, the Immigration Council Access Pilot Program,
• Black immigrants face barriers in accessing culturally competent legal services in immigration proceedings
• Through our in-house immigration unit, our immigration attorneys provide legal support to over 1,000

Summary: The committee heard a lengthy budget hearing focused on child care, child welfare, and immigration-related services, with most of the discussion centered on child care funding, slot utilization, and rate reform. Department of Social Services officials said the Governor’s budget would provide $6.8 billion for child care programs in 2026-27, including $11.5 million in Prop. 64 funds for mini-grants to licensed facilities affected by 2025 disasters. They also described federal CCDF and Prop. 64 revenue reductions that would reduce general child care funding by about 4,176 slots, while emphasizing that the cuts should not affect currently enrolled children. The LAO supported aligning spending with lower revenues and asked for more detail on the disaster grant program. Members questioned why so many awarded slots remain uncontracted or unfilled, and DSS said delays are largely due to providers building new infrastructure, licensing, staffing, and enrollment work. One senator criticized the repeated explanation, argued unspent funds revert to the General Fund instead of being redirected to child care, and urged shifting more funding from contract slots to vouchers and increasing flexibility for infrastructure and expansion costs. DSS said it is exploring more flexibility, better readiness screening, and quicker redistribution of relinquished slots. The committee also discussed the Emergency Child Care Bridge program, with DSS saying it can redistribute funds among counties to avoid disenrolling children. A second panel addressed the state’s broader commitment to expand child care and move toward a single rate structure. DSS reported that since 2021-22 nearly 125,000 new slots have been awarded across CCTR, CAPP, CMAP, and the Emergency Child Care Bridge program, bringing monthly service levels to more than 366,700 children. The department and CDE described progress on rate reform, including completion of the alternative methodology and joint recommendations from the labor-management committee on a single-rate framework. County and provider testimony emphasized persistent unmet need, especially for infant and toddler care, and argued that current reimbursement disparities between CDSS-funded programs and state preschool create inequities and discourage expansion. Stanislaus County Office of Education said rate differences can materially affect local program revenue and staffing, while Parent Voices California described the child care system as difficult to navigate and inequitable, especially for Black families and survivors of domestic violence. The California Budget and Policy Center argued that only a small share of eligible children are served, that Universal TK has concentrated investment in school-based settings, and that providers are still paid far below the cost of care. Members pressed the administration for deadlines on automation and implementation of the single-rate structure, and DSS said some work can proceed before collective bargaining concludes, though policy decisions are still needed. The committee also reviewed several trailer bill proposals. For the COLA, DSS proposed applying the 2026-27 increase through cost-of-care-plus payments, but acknowledged it had inadvertently excluded CalWORKs Child Care and the Emergency Child Care Bridge from the initial calculation; the LAO recommended making the COLA increase uniform across child care and state preschool programs. On the alternative methodology survey, DSS proposed replacing the market rate survey with the federally approved alternative methodology and aligning the timing with the federal CCDF state plan cycle. On licensed family child care homes, DSS proposed limiting temporary absences to 20% of monthly care hours and allowing more flexibility for medical appointments, jury duty, training, and union activities. On excessive unexplained absences, DSS proposed a statutory definition to align state policy with federal rules allowing disenrollment after 30 days of unexplained absences. The committee also discussed a proposal to require contractors to collect family fees directly so the full voucher value reaches providers, with DSS saying it is working with Riverside County on implementation and CDE asking that the same policy apply to state preschool. Finally, the committee reviewed an Early Childhood Policy Council reappropriation and reporting proposal, with DSS explaining that prior funds were underused because participation costs are hard to estimate and that additional staffing and contractor support would be needed for the expanded annual report requirements.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our immigrant community is scared.
• Immigration and Customs Enforcement in the workplace.
• Notification allows immigrant workers time.
• About one in five workers in Washington State are immigrants, and most immigrant families are mixed status
• I urge you to support the Immigrant Worker Protection Act.

Bills: HB2091, HB2105, HB2218, HB2107, HB2137, HB2243, HB2264

Keywords: public employers, employee information, bargaining representatives, labor relations, union representation, immigrant worker protections, immigrant rights, worker protections, I-9 audit, Form I-9, employment eligibility verification, workplace raid, federal immigration inspection, employer notice, anti-retaliation, retaliation, Attorney General enforcement, private right of action, labor law, workplace rights

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> immigration statutes. immigration statutes.
• This bill has to do with immigration enforcement. Civil immigration enforcement.
• </c> with immigration force it enforcement. with immigration force it enforcement.
• </c> in their immigration proceedings. in their immigration proceedings.
• </c> checked for their immigration status. checked for their immigration status.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Immigrant Rights. Immigrant Rights.
• </c><00:22:31.440><c> rights</c> the Hoy coalition for immigrant rights the Hoy coalition for immigrant
• 00:22:33.039><c> serving</c> represents about 30 immigrant serving represents about 30 immigrant serving
• Adopting civil immigration statute.
• immigration immigration interview. interview. interview.

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:

• At a time when escalating anti-immigrant policies and persecution are deliberately targeting immigrant
• At a time when escalating anti-immigrant policies and persecution are deliberately targeting immigrant
• Also noting support for Immigrant Legal Defense, Services, Immigrant Rights and Education Network (SIREN
• Also noting support for Immigrant Legal Defense, Services, Immigrant Rights and Education Network (SIREN
• Also noting support for Immigrant Legal Defense, Services, Immigrant Rights and Education Network (SIREN

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Human Services heard testimony on a series of bills affecting disability services, child welfare, foster youth, domestic violence survivors, guaranteed income pilots, crisis response, and child care providers. AB 1575 would update the Lanterman Act to use person-first language and broaden respite services to allow safe community access; supporters said it would improve dignity and consistency in services, and there was no opposition. AB 2470 would create a statewide one-stop reentry program for survivors of intimate partner violence to replace documents, repair credit, and access housing supports, while also giving CalWORKs emergency housing funds more flexibility; the Little Hoover Commission backed the bill based on its prior recommendations. AB 2510 would clarify and expand CalWORKs family reunification aid so parents can keep receiving support during reunification even if not all children are removed, and supporters said it would reduce barriers and better align with reunification goals. AB 2585 would expand guaranteed income pilot funding to rural and underserved counties, with testimony emphasizing the need for geographic diversity and data from places like the Central Valley. AB 1932, the Crisis Act 2.0, would continue and strengthen community-based mental health crisis response programs; testimony from family members and advocates strongly favored non-law-enforcement responses, and the bill drew broad support. AB 1925 would direct a feasibility study on a statewide permanent disability certification process to reduce repeated verification burdens; the committee approved it 4-0 and sent it to Appropriations. AB 2189 would fund a statewide special education parent action network to train and connect parents for systemic advocacy; after some opposition over the use of state funds for advocacy, it passed as amended and was referred to Education. AB 2684 would allow out-of-state nonminor dependents to do monthly social worker visits virtually, with in-person visits still required quarterly; it passed to Judiciary. AB 1967 would improve pathways for older youth experiencing homelessness or failed adoptions to enter or reenter foster care, and it passed to Appropriations. AB 2126 would create a targeted background-check exemption for certain former foster youth hired as peer partners, and it passed as amended to Public Safety. AB 2379 would require DSS to notify family child care providers of Fourth Amendment rights and provide multilingual know-your-rights training regarding immigration enforcement; it passed to Judiciary after some members questioned whether DSS was the right agency to administer the training.

Transcript Highlights:

• Provides food assistance to immigrants who otherwise are not eligible, certain immigrants who are otherwise
• Thank you for speaking up for immigrant neighbors.
• families, and over 100,000 immigrant Californians will lose access to Covered California. 74,000 immigrant
• Now, there's been mention of the immigrant population.
• Chloe Armosea with the California Immigrant Policy Center.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight held its fifth hearing of the year to examine the newly enacted federal H.R. 1 and its effects on California. Members and the chair described the law as a major threat to state health, food, education, and climate programs, and emphasized that California would not be able to fully backfill the federal cuts. Several members also highlighted the bill’s tax provisions, including temporary deductions for tips, overtime, seniors, and auto loan interest, while warning that the largest benefits flow to higher-income taxpayers and that major cuts to Medi-Cal, CalFresh, and clean-energy incentives are delayed or phased in over time. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Department of Finance presented detailed overviews of the bill’s likely impacts and implementation timelines. They identified the main affected areas as health care coverage and financing, food assistance, higher education, personal income taxes, and clean-energy/electric-vehicle credits. They explained that H.R. 1 limits provider taxes used to finance Medi-Cal, adds work and redetermination requirements, restricts CalFresh eligibility and increases state costs, changes student loan and Pell Grant rules, extends and modifies federal tax provisions, and phases out many clean-energy credits. Finance also noted major rescissions of Inflation Reduction Act funds, new border and immigration enforcement spending, and the possibility of PAYGO sequestration if Congress does not act to offset the deficit increase. During member questions, the committee focused on likely enrollment losses, administrative burdens, and fiscal exposure for the state and counties. Witnesses said many details still depend on federal guidance, but they estimated significant impacts on Medi-Cal, CalFresh, and graduate/professional student borrowing, and noted that California’s high CalFresh error rate could increase state costs. UC testified that the elimination of Graduate PLUS loans would affect thousands of professional students, especially in health, law, and other high-cost programs. Members asked for follow-up data on county, health, and tax impacts, and staff agreed to provide additional tables and estimates as implementation guidance becomes clearer. Public commenters from counties, early childhood advocates, health coalitions, disability rights groups, immigrant-rights organizations, and other stakeholders urged the Legislature to mitigate the law’s effects. They warned of higher county costs, reduced access to health care and food assistance, increased administrative burdens, and harm to children, immigrants, people with disabilities, and low-income families. Several urged new state revenue solutions and stronger protections for Medi-Cal, CalFresh, child care, and home- and community-based services. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational and ended with a commitment to continue monitoring federal guidance and to work on state responses in the budget process.

Transcript Highlights:

• proceedings in Immigration related proceedings in Immigration<00:48:19.040><c> Court</c><00:48:19.760
• related proceed proceedings immigration related proceed proceedings in<00:51:26.680><c> Immigration<
• immigr immigr immigration<00:56:17.039><c> cases</c><00:56:17.319><c> are</c><00:56:17.559><c> civil
• </c><01:05:40.119><c> pleading</c> countries and the immigrants pleading countries and the immigrants
• c> is</c> immigration relief immigration law is immigration relief immigration law is very<01:09:01.520

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The joint Commerce and Consumer Protection and Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs committees heard HB 756 HD1, a measure on flavored tobacco products. Supporters included the Attorney General, Department of Health, Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities, youth advocates, public health groups, and Kaiser Permanente. They argued flavored tobacco and menthol are used to attract and addict young people, cited rising youth and young adult vaping rates, and pointed to public health harms and evidence from other states that flavor restrictions reduced e-cigarette sales. The Attorney General requested oral amendments to correct a statutory reference, repeal a county preemption provision so counties could enact stricter flavor bans, and restore appropriations, positions, and the original effective date. Opponents, including retail and wholesale businesses, argued the bill would hurt small businesses and state tax revenue, push sales to the black market, and remove a harm-reduction option for adult smokers; they urged stronger enforcement instead of a ban. After testimony, the committees took up amendments and recommendations. The chair proposed correcting the statutory citation to HRS 26-38, adopting a Department of Health amendment on disposal of electronic smoking devices and e-liquids as hazardous waste, and noting the appropriations, FTE, and effective date in the committee report. Members then voted to pass HB 756 HD1 with amendments in both committees, with the Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs committee recording one member as supporting with reservations. The transcript then moved to HB 806, relating to fireworks, which would appropriate funds for the Department of Law Enforcement to conduct sting operations on Oʻahu to enforce fireworks laws. The Department of Law Enforcement and Honolulu Police Department supported the bill, saying undercover enforcement is costly and additional funding is needed. A community testifier also supported stronger enforcement, citing illegal aerial fireworks, noise, and impacts on pets and kupuna. No final vote on HB 806 was shown in the excerpt. The Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs committee also heard HB 438, which would create a Due Process in Immigration Proceedings Program to provide legal representation in immigration court for income-qualified individuals. Support came from civil rights, legal aid, ACLU, and law school clinic representatives, who said counsel is needed to ensure due process and fair access to justice, especially because immigration proceedings can lead to deportation and family separation. Opposition testifiers argued taxpayer-funded counsel for people in immigration proceedings is inappropriate, unlawful, or unfair to citizens and legal residents. One law school representative suggested a technical amendment to broaden language about training and education. The excerpt ends before a final vote on HB 438 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• The immigration protocols would require schools to provide immigration resources to students, staff,
• </c> state that reflects the immigration state that reflects the immigration protocols<00:48:56.960><
• > immigration protocols would require immigration protocols would require schools<00:49:01.440><c> to
• </c> immigration status. immigration status.
• </c> particularly an immigration attorney. particularly an immigration attorney.

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and illegal immigration.
• </c> Citizenship and Immigration Services. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
• </c> them to federal immigration authority. them to federal immigration authority.
• We have an immigration status.
• </c> immigration problem that we got to fix. immigration problem that we got to fix.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• These immigrants want and need... ...is limited English proficiency.
• So immigration is the only way for us to... ...for cheaper states or better weather, so immigration is
• And what's typically offered to immigrants.
• Immigrant families and communities are being targeted in the Commonwealth and many, even those with Immigrant
• We need to consider ways to incentivize immigrant workers and immigrant families to stay and engage them

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development heard testimony on several workforce-related bills, with most of the hearing focused on ESOL and apprenticeship legislation, followed by testimony on a four-day workweek pilot and paid prenatal leave. On ESOL, witnesses including the Boston Foundation, Skillworks, MassINC, MIRA, JVS Boston, Eastern Bank, immigrant advocates, employers, and legislators supported H.2080/S.1326, arguing that Massachusetts has a large backlog of limited-English-proficiency residents waiting for classes, that ESOL is essential to economic mobility and immigrant integration, and that the state needs a coordinated, statewide strategy with more vocational and workplace-focused English instruction. Testifiers cited long waitlists, fragmented delivery across agencies, labor shortages, and examples of workplace English programs helping immigrants gain jobs, advance careers, and support businesses. Committee members asked questions about how vocational ESOL differs from standard classes, and witnesses explained that it focuses on job-specific language and workplace scenarios. The committee also heard strong support for H.2085/S.1303, which would require more use of registered apprentices on public construction projects over $1 million. Labor leaders from the Massachusetts AFL-CIO and Massachusetts Building Trades, along with electricians and apprentices, said the bill would help apprentices complete training by ensuring enough job-site hours, expand access to good union careers, and strengthen the construction workforce for housing, infrastructure, and clean energy work. Several witnesses defended existing apprenticeship ratios and electrical licensing standards, warning against deregulation and emphasizing safety. Committee members asked about project thresholds and apprenticeship ratios, and witnesses said the bill’s phased apprentice-hour requirement was intended to cover most public projects under current cost conditions. The committee then heard testimony on S.1330, a four-day workweek pilot program. Senator Dillon Fernandez and Representative Shirley Arriaga described the proposal as a response to burnout, affordability pressures, and changing workplace norms, arguing that a pilot would let Massachusetts study whether shorter workweeks improve productivity, retention, and worker well-being. Witnesses said the model could help families balance caregiving and commuting while maintaining or improving output. Finally, the committee took testimony on S.1361, establishing paid prenatal leave. Parents, health advocates, March of Dimes, and others said paid leave would help pregnant workers attend critical prenatal appointments, reduce missed care, and improve maternal and infant health outcomes. Several speakers shared personal stories about high-risk pregnancies, pregnancy loss, and the financial strain of taking unpaid time off. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee primarily received testimony and asked a limited number of questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Coalition of Humane Immigrant Rights.
• from civil immigration detention.
• our immigrant community.
• Immigration enforcement policies and rhetoric have created fear throughout our immigrant communities.
• Of those humanitarian immigrants, 70% are AAPI.

Summary: The Select Committee on Hate, Racism, and Xenophobia heard opening remarks framing hate crimes as a growing threat to civil rights and democracy, with particular concern about online radicalization, political scapegoating, and attacks on protected communities. The California Department of Justice presented its 2025 hate crimes report, noting 1,955 reported hate crime events in 2025, a 3.4% decline from 2024 but still historically elevated. DOJ said race and ethnicity remained the largest category, with anti-Black bias the most frequently reported, anti-Hispanic/Latino bias rising sharply, and religion-, gender-, sexual orientation-, and gender identity-based incidents remaining significant. The California Commission on the State of Hate said its research shows hate is broader than official crime data, with millions of Californians experiencing hate incidents and many victims needing mental health, legal, financial, and other services beyond law enforcement. Committee members and witnesses discussed the causes of hate, especially social media radicalization, misinformation, and the role of public rhetoric. Testimony emphasized that online content moderation has weakened, that young men are often heavily radicalized online, and that state policy should focus on education, data collection, law enforcement training, and community-based prevention. The committee also discussed prior and current legislation aimed at hate prevention and training, and witnesses urged stronger data-sharing, permanent research infrastructure, and better support for victims and frontline organizations. A second panel of community organizations described impacts on their communities and asked for targeted policy responses. The NAACP highlighted rising anti-Black hate and the need for sustainable funding and better reporting; LULAC emphasized fear tied to ethnicity and immigration status and called for multilingual outreach and solidarity; Jewish California described rising antisemitism, support for AB 715 and AB 2664, and the need to recognize Jewish ethnicity in state law; CHIRLA urged stronger oversight of immigration enforcement and detention, plus legal services and know-your-rights programs; Asian Americans Advancing Justice focused on language access, historical erasure, safety, and opportunity; CAIR California cited a sharp rise in anti-Muslim hate, the San Diego mosque shooting, and called for fair security funding and stronger civil rights protections; and Equality California described continued attacks on LGBTQ+ people and asked for privacy, health care, and anti-discrimination protections. No formal votes were taken; the hearing concluded with public comment and closing remarks emphasizing solidarity and continued legislative action.

Transcript Highlights:

• California's immigration services already have restrictions.
• That includes due process in immigration court under immigration law.
• behalf of Immigrant Legal Defense, Acacia Center for Justice, Immigrant Legal Defense, the Immigration
• You hate immigrants? No, I don't.
• So do you hate immigrants? No, I don't.

Summary: The Assembly Human Services Committee met with quorum established after beginning as a subcommittee. The committee heard AB 790, which would require jurisdictions receiving state homelessness funds to develop systems specifically supporting women and children, especially single mothers and survivors of domestic violence. Supporters said current homelessness programs overlook this population; the bill was amended and passed unanimously on a 7-0 vote. The committee also heard ACA 4, the Housing Opportunities Made Equal Act, which would dedicate a minimum share of the state general fund to affordable housing and homelessness programs. Supporters argued more stable funding is needed to address the housing crisis, while opponents questioned whether more spending would help; the measure passed 5-2 to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. Members then heard AB 349, which would index the infant supplement for parenting foster youth to inflation. The author and sponsor described the needs of pregnant and parenting teens in foster care and rising costs for diapers and formula; the bill passed 6-0 to Appropriations. AB 779, which expands a domestic violence consultant pilot in child welfare offices statewide, also passed 6-0 after testimony that it would help keep families together safely and improve trauma-informed responses. AB 1335, which would remove a private CARF accreditation requirement for regional center employment programs and rely on state oversight instead, drew support from disability service providers but opposition from the chair over concerns about weakening quality checks; it failed on a 2-2 vote and reconsideration was denied. The committee also considered AB 1066, a bill to bar state-funded immigration legal services for people unlawfully present in the country who have certain serious felony convictions. Supporters framed it as a public-safety and fiscal-responsibility measure, while opponents said it would restrict due process and align California with mass-deportation policies. The bill failed on a 2-2 vote. Two bills, AB 277 and AB 318, were pulled by the author and not heard. After final roll calls on absent members, the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill doesn't require officers to determine immigration law or make immigration judgments.
• My agent Absolutely support the enforcement of our federal immigration laws.
• We work very well with immigration and we make those arrests.
• Yes, there are, because the issue that we have is immigration.
• For us to determine immigration status, it can't just be the FBI database.

Summary: The Local Government Committee approved the February 24, 2026 minutes and then heard House Bill 660, sponsored by Representative Dale Hawkins. Hawkins said the bill would require law enforcement to collect and publish biannual statewide data on the immigration status and nationality of arrested individuals, arguing Idaho taxpayers should know the costs and jail impacts associated with people in the country unlawfully. He said the bill was intended to create a uniform reporting system and that the state needs better information to manage immigration-related detention costs. Testimony was split. Supporters, including Secure Idaho representatives Michael Angela and Tim O’Donnell, said the bill would improve transparency, use information already gathered during booking, and help lawmakers make policy based on measurable data. Opponents, including Idaho Chiefs of Police Association representative Tracy Bastercia, argued the bill would burden local police, create confusion about who must collect the data, potentially duplicate work already done at the jail level, and raise concerns about asking citizens their nationality and publishing sensitive information. Several members questioned whether the fiscal note was accurate and whether the bill should be limited to sheriff’s offices and jail booking rather than all law enforcement agencies. After closing testimony, Representative Wheeler moved to hold the bill in committee, but that motion failed 8-7. The original motion to send HB 660 to the floor with a do-pass recommendation then passed 8-7. The chair noted interest in possible cleanup of the bill’s language, and the committee adjourned with a reminder that it may need to meet again later in the week for Senate bills.