Transcript Highlights:

• In a classroom with people that we, as parents, have to trust—a tremendous amount of trust—in the people
• HB 859 is a reasonable step toward building trust between parents and schools.
• I want to trust... I don't want to fear what happens when they leave my child at school.
• I want to trust the system designed to protect them. This bill helps make that possible.
• This is a way to build that trust again. Thank you. Thank you.

Committee: House Education & Employment Committee

Summary: The committee first took up CS for CS for HB 1471, which would bar Florida courts from enforcing foreign or religious law that conflicts with the U.S. or Florida Constitution, create a process for designating domestic terrorist organizations, and prohibit public funds from supporting such organizations. The sponsor said the bill protects constitutional supremacy, due process, and taxpayer dollars, while opponents argued it was vague, targeted religion, and could be used to suppress dissent and protected speech. Members debated whether a conviction was required, who would make designations, and what consequences would follow; an amendment changing student expulsion language from “may” to “shall” was adopted. After extensive public testimony both for and against, the bill passed 16-4 and was reported favorably with amendment. The committee then heard CS for CS for HB 1071, an education bill covering parental opt-outs for certain health instruction, required instruction on embryology, fetal development, and HIV/AIDS, math plan requirements, student-led organizations, epinephrine access, instructional material review, safe-school officer options, and chronic absenteeism reporting. The sponsor framed it as a parental rights, academics, accountability, and safety measure, while opponents said parts of the bill would restrict sex education, chill student organizations, and undermine DEI-related activities and LGBTQ student groups. Several amendments were offered by the ranking member to remove or soften the provisions restricting funding for DEI and social/political activism, but those amendments failed. The committee adopted a Trabulsy amendment requiring districts to publicize virtual instruction options, and another amendment clarifying reading-coach language and safe-school officer options, as well as an amendment giving publishers an appeals process if removed for noncompliant materials. A final Trabulsy amendment requiring annual reporting of chronic absenteeism by grade level was also adopted. Public testimony on the bill remained sharply divided, with supporters emphasizing embryology, parental rights, and school safety, and opponents warning about censorship, reduced reproductive health education, and harm to student expression. The transcript ends during continued public testimony on HB 1071, before final committee action on the bill is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• You've heard from judicial partners or people in the judicial system.
• I'm very concerned about the Seventh Judicial District and the 11th Judicial District.
• About the Seventh Judicial District and the 11th Judicial District, I know that the 11th Judicial District
• The 11th Judicial District and the Seventh Judicial District need to be adjusted. Would you agree?
• For the unified judicial budget? Okay.

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Summary: The committee first heard an Aging and Long-Term Services Department budget presentation comparing the LFC and executive recommendations. The main differences were in the Aging Network, Adult Protective Services, Program Support, and Long-Term Care Division, especially the executive’s proposed $10 million infusion into the Kiki Savadra Senior Dignity Fund and $6.2 million for expanding New Mexico Care. LFC staff explained that the committee recommendation was lower in general fund and fund-balance use, while the executive emphasized rising senior population needs, meal and transportation costs, and the cost savings of keeping older adults at home. The secretary also reviewed the department’s special requests, including the conference on aging, outreach, emergency preparedness, and the Kiki fund, and described New Mexico Care’s growth, its evaluation results, and the department’s plan to separate Kiki into its own accounting fund. Members largely focused on senior services, rural meal delivery, transportation, caregiver support, and the Kiki fund. Several members urged stronger support for non-metro aging providers and for New Mexico Care, citing its role in keeping seniors out of nursing homes and the program’s reported savings and outcomes. Questions also covered eligibility, background checks for caregivers, respite care, dementia and Alzheimer’s screening, and whether Kiki funds can support home modifications such as ramps. The committee then voted to adopt the LFC recommendation with one executive language change: adding the executive’s page 14 language allowing an additional 12.5% distribution for initial payments to aging network providers at the start of FY27. Representative Dow opposed the motion. The committee then moved to the Attorney General’s budget. LFC staff explained that the office’s budget relies heavily on the Consumer Settlement Fund, with both recommendations reducing general fund revenue while increasing settlement-fund use, and that performance measures were in consensus. The Attorney General said the office was not seeking more general fund, but wanted greater ability to use funds it recovers. He highlighted major consumer and public safety work, including litigation against major social media and AI platforms, a case involving Snapchat and child exploitation/extortion, the statewide crime gun intelligence center, efforts to address oilfield theft, work on missing and murdered Indigenous persons, and efforts to protect federal funds coming into New Mexico.

Transcript Highlights:

• judicial judicial function<00:02:43.320><c> is</c><00:02:44.160><c> that</c><00:02:45.040><c> it</c>
• Public office is a public trust.
• Public office is a public trust.
• </c> way that would undermine public trust. way that would undermine public trust.
• </c> cuz I received the chair of the Judicial cuz I received the chair of the Judicial Committee.<01:

Bills: SB2041

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Summary: The committees heard SB 2041, which would repeal the Land Court, transfer its functions to the Bureau of Conveyances, and create a working group to recommend implementation. DLNR and Judiciary stood on their written testimony, while Realtors supported the bill and one testifier raised concerns about the loss of judicial authority, title disputes, adverse possession, and possible effects on Kuleana lands. Members questioned whether property could be deregistered and what the legal consequences would be, and the Bureau of Conveyances said deregistration is already available but burdensome. The committees ultimately recommended passage with amendments, and the measure was adopted by both committees. The Judiciary Committee then heard SB 2247, which restricts certain governor-appointed, Senate-confirmed executive branch employees from participating in campaign fundraising. The State Ethics Commission and Campaign Spending Commission supported the bill as a way to curb pay-to-play concerns and the appearance of undue influence, and several advocacy and civic groups also testified in support, with one person opposing. The committee agreed to amend the bill so the restrictions apply only after confirmation and continue until the person leaves the covered position. The committee voted to pass SB 2247 with amendments. Finally, the Judiciary Committee heard SB 2143, which would make the Attorney General the interim Chief Election Officer if that office becomes vacant until the Elections Commission appoints a replacement. Supporters argued the bill would provide continuity, prevent delays in certifying election results, and protect election integrity; opponents argued it would politicize the office, create a conflict of interest, and was unnecessary because current law already provides a process for filling vacancies. Testimony was extensive and sharply divided, with many speakers on both sides. The transcript provided does not include a final vote or action on SB 2143.

Transcript Highlights:

• A pre-need burial contract, also known as a trust, is a way to fund a funeral for the future.
• </c> So, in 1976, when they did the Judicial So, in 1976, when they did the Judicial Reform<00:21:48.080
• The Judicial Reform Act of the '70s, I think, was like 18 pages long.
• The Judicial Reform Act of the '70s, I think, was like 18 pages long.
• The Judicial Reform Act of the '70s, I The Judicial Reform Act of the '70s, I think<00:25:48.640><c>

Committee: Senate State & Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> that federal agents have a judicial that federal agents have a judicial warrant<00:13:26.720><c>
• </c> they don't trust their local cops. they don't trust their local cops.
• Appropriate judicial warrants. right? Appropriate judicial warrants.
• </c><01:23:36.320><c> warrant</c> protections including a judicial warrant protections including a judicial
• Thank you for the opportunity to testify. a trust in perpetuity. and having a a trust in perpetuity.

Committee: House Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 1768, which would prohibit state and county law enforcement agencies and officials from entering into federal immigration-enforcement agreements under 8 U.S.C. 1357(g) and from assisting in certain immigration enforcement actions except in limited circumstances. The Office of the Public Defender, Hawaii Coalition for Immigrant Rights, the Legal Clinic, and the ACLU of Hawaiʻi all testified in strong support, arguing the bill would protect due process, reduce fear in immigrant communities, preserve trust in local police, and keep local resources focused on public safety. Testifiers said cooperation with immigration enforcement can chill court attendance, crime reporting, and cooperation with police, and they emphasized that the bill would not stop federal enforcement or affect other deputization agreements for environmental or other criminal matters. Committee members asked whether any 287(g) agreements currently exist in Hawaiʻi; testifiers said they were unaware of any and believed the bill would maintain the status quo. No vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee then took up House Bill 1548, which would reduce the maximum sentence for misdemeanors from one year to 364 days and allow people previously sentenced to one year to seek sentence modification. The Office of the Public Defender, Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the Legal Clinic, the Hawaii Coalition for Immigrant Rights, the ACLU of Hawaiʻi, and the William S. Richardson School of Law immigration clinic all supported the measure, saying the one-day change could prevent severe immigration consequences such as detention, removal, and bars to relief that can be triggered by a sentence of 365 days or more. Testifiers stressed that the bill would not change criminal liability or public safety, but would align Hawaiʻi law with similar reforms adopted in other states. Members questioned whether the change would affect citizens or create an automatic immigration process; witnesses responded that the issue is the federal immigration consequence tied to the maximum sentence, not actual time served, and that citizens would not face that consequence. The transcript ends during continued discussion of HB 1548, with no final vote shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> a judicial warrant to arrest someone. a judicial warrant to arrest someone.
• </c> person uh they would need a judicial person uh they would need a judicial warrant<00:24:19.919><
• This bill creates accountability, which builds trust. Trust is a critical part of law enforcement.
• It erodes public trust.
• It erodess public trust. And start now. It erodess public trust.

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• this bill has language in it saying that the bonds are not required in trust bank accounts.
• out a trust and discharging a trustee when there is no dispute.
• We spoke about some of these trust laws, a decanting trust, and Senator Osgood, you did a great bill
• this year with Senator Garcia on trust where basically you video record the trust while it's being created
• So my fear in all this is when people change trust.

Bills: S0002

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Summary: The Judiciary Committee took up a long agenda of bills, including several claims bills and policy measures. It heard and approved, mostly unanimously, bills on curators of estates (SB 326, as amended), remedies under the Florida Civil Rights Act (SB 1096), a claim for Reginald Jackson against the City of Lakeland (SB 28), a DCF-related claim for L.E. (SB 6), trust administration reform (SB 786, as amended), a Broward County claim for the estate of a deceased minor (SB 18, as amended, 10-1), a DOT claim for the estate of Mark Legata (SB 26), veterans’ courts (CS/SB 50), extracurricular activities in public K-12 schools (CS/CS/SB 538, as amended), and pet sale protections for dogs and cats (SB 1004). The committee also considered the sovereign immunity claims bill (SB 1366), which was presented as a starting point for negotiations with the House and was reported favorably after testimony from local government, hospital, and school representatives who urged the Senate to hold to its current lower cap levels. The committee later approved a claims bill for the estate of Daniel Maudsley against DHSMV (SB 2). The meeting included repeated roll calls and favorable reports on each measure, with the only recorded no vote on SB 18 from Senator Osgood. Several bills drew testimony from supporters and, in some cases, objections. SB 50 on veterans’ courts received broad support from veterans’ groups, criminal justice organizations, and community advocates who said it would expand problem-solving court options for veterans dealing with service-related issues. SB 538 on extracurricular activities drew support and opposition, and was amended to address home education eligibility, a school activity fee issue, technical conforming changes, and compensation for extracurricular sponsors. SB 1004 was presented as consumer protection legislation aimed at retail pet dealers, requiring disclosure of animal health records and financing terms and creating a private right of action for violations. The committee also heard extensive testimony on SB 1178, which would create a foreign interference restriction and enforcement framework targeting foreign countries of concern and designated foreign terrorist organizations. Supporters described it as a national-security measure to limit foreign influence, protect critical infrastructure, and restrict gifts, contracts, and sister-city ties; the sponsor withdrew one amendment and the bill was reported favorably. Finally, SB 1632, dealing with ideologies inconsistent with American principles, prompted substantial questioning about due process, domestic terrorist organization designations, Sharia law references, student discipline, and notice procedures. The sponsor said the bill was intended to protect constitutional principles and target conduct rather than belief, but the transcript ends while public testimony on that bill is still underway.

Transcript Highlights:

• They also erode public trust in emergency services. Victims are not limited to individuals.
• And perhaps, most importantly, they lose trust in the public services.
• People lose trust in the public services and agencies working to provide assistance.
• This is about fairness in our judicial process.
• our judicial officers to do their job.

Summary: The committee heard several public safety and privacy bills, with extensive testimony on each. AB 1872 by Assembly Member Ta would make repeat swatting a wobbler and require offenders to compensate victims for property damage. Supporters, including civil liberties, sheriff, and district attorney representatives, said swatting is a serious and growing threat to first responders, schools, and public officials. Opponents argued existing law already covers false emergency reports and warned the bill could worsen penalties for people with mental illness. The committee approved the bill on a do pass motion to Appropriations. AB 1727, also by Assembly Member Ta, would make it a misdemeanor to transfer or sell a person’s genetic data without consent. Supporters framed the bill as a needed privacy protection in light of advances in genetic technology and AI, citing examples such as HeLa cells and concerns about unauthorized DNA collection. Opponents, including ACLU Cal Action, said civil penalties already exist under current law and objected to creating a new carceral offense for nonviolent conduct. The committee accepted amendments and moved the bill forward as amended to the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee. The committee then took up AB 1782 by Assembly Member DeMaio, which would lower the threshold for retaining certain offenders with mental health disorders in state hospital custody and broaden the conduct considered in dangerousness determinations. Supporters said the bill responds to a recent release case and would help prevent dangerous releases; opponents, including disability rights and public defender groups, said it would weaken due process and expand involuntary confinement. The chair recommended a no vote, and the bill remained on call after a split roll. AB 1632 by Assembly Member Johnson, which removes the notarization requirement for trespass authorization letters, passed as amended despite opposition from homelessness advocates and public defenders who said it could increase arrests of unhoused people; supporters said it would reduce bureaucracy and help property owners and police respond to trespassing. The committee also heard AB 1968 by Assembly Member Gallagher, which would add conspiracy to commit murder to the list of offenses eligible for heightened juvenile court handling; supporters cited a foiled school attack in Tehama County, while opponents warned of overbroad punishment and racial disparities. The bill was discussed but not yet voted on in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> zero independent oversight or judicial zero independent oversight or judicial review.<00:18:05.360
• <00:49:34.000><c> oversight</c> judicial oversight judicial oversight with<00:49:36.319><c> regard</c
• &gt;&gt; there should be judicial overview on &gt;&gt; there should be judicial overview on these<00:
• </c> uh there's got to be some judicial uh there's got to be some judicial oversight<00:58:55.760><c>
• </c><01:06:44.799><c> contact</c> would be contacting the trusted contact would be contacting the trusted

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• It does not interfere with judicial discipline, case adjudication, or constitutional supervision.
• , basic due process protections apply: notice, an opportunity to be heard, written findings, and judicial
• the judicial branch comes into this chamber and demonstrates a contempt for the people of Arizona, the
• So I elect someone I trust to be my trier of fact in that small court, and then that's...
• I trust to be my trier of fact in that small court.

Committee: House House Federalism, Military Affairs & Elections Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee first took up HB 2663, which expands military leave protections by aligning state law language with federal military orders and clarifying that state and non-state employees called to service or training are covered. Representative Pena said the bill was intended to remove confusion and had no material impact on benefits. After brief supportive discussion, the committee voted 7-0 to give HB 2663 a do pass recommendation. The committee then heard HB 2976, a bill establishing due process requirements before state or county entities can alter a justice of the peace’s statutory authority and clarifying the limits of administrative control over justice courts. Representative Hernandez and two Pima County justices of the peace testified in support, describing administrative orders that had removed local control without notice, findings, or a clear path to restoration. Leanna Garcia of the Arizona Supreme Court opposed the bill, arguing it conflicted with the Constitution’s grant of administrative supervision to the Supreme Court and that the court already uses complaint-driven oversight, education, and intervention when needed. After extensive debate over constitutional authority, due process, and the role of elected JPs, the committee voted 6-1 to recommend HB 2976 do pass. Next, the committee considered HB 2406, which directs the Arizona Department of Veterans’ Services to study veterans’ awareness of available state, local, and federal benefits and report recommendations to improve outreach. Supporters said many veterans do not know the full range of benefits and that the study could identify gaps in awareness and help guide future outreach. Members questioned what exactly would be studied and whether a study was necessary, but several said the testimony clarified the bill’s purpose. The committee approved HB 2406 with a 5-1-1 vote. Finally, the committee heard HB 2226, which requires courts at initial appearance to ask whether a defendant is a veteran so eligible cases can be referred to veterans programs or treatment/diversion options. Testimony in support said the inquiry would help identify veterans early and connect them to services at no cost. A member raised a Fifth Amendment concern that veteran status could be incriminating in some cases; the bill’s supporter agreed to an amendment clarifying that the answer could not be used against the defendant in later proceedings. The transcript ends during discussion of that proposed amendment, before a final committee vote on HB 2226 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because I have concerns about us intervening in a judicial branch process right now, while this very
• So what we're basically doing is making a law to try to influence the judicial system on a—just like
• That is the source of unclarity between these two judicial interpretations right now.
• With the two judicial interpretations right now, it can take some time for the Supreme Court to be able
• Specifically, AB 2005 will allow the trustee of a living trust who is currently the primary resident

Summary: The Senate Local Government Committee heard several housing, water, labor, and local governance bills. AB 1621, by Assembly Member Wilson, would tighten timelines and limit repeated plan checks in post-entitlement housing permitting; supporters said it would reduce delays and costs, while cities and counties opposed or sought amendments over concerns about health-and-safety review and litigation risk. AB 2005 would expand SB 9 lot-split eligibility to certain owners using trusts or LLCs and allow partnerships with small builders; supporters framed it as a homeownership tool, while Realtors and others warned it would weaken SB 9’s owner-occupancy guardrails and invite speculative development. AB 2397 would create a financing tool for rural housing infrastructure districts, with the author and a developer witness saying it would help projects secure roads, water, and sewer funding. The committee also considered AB 2180, which would clarify Proposition 218 rate-setting standards for public water agencies. Water agencies, cities, counties, and other local entities supported the bill as a response to conflicting court decisions and rising litigation, while taxpayer and consumer opponents argued the Legislature should not intervene while the issue is pending before the California Supreme Court and warned the bill could weaken constitutional protections against cost shifting. After debate, the committee voted 3-2 to send AB 2180 to the Senate floor. AB 1838 would require bidders on public works projects to disclose recent wage-and-hour violations; labor groups supported it as a transparency and worker-protection measure, while contractors opposed it as burdensome and likely to reduce competition. The committee voted 2-2 on the bill, leaving it open. Members also heard AB 2134, which would allow local elected officials to take parental leave without publicly disclosing private medical or family information in order to avoid removal for missed meetings; it received broad support and passed unanimously to Judiciary. AB 2308 would extend an existing tax-increment financing timeline for the San Francisco Transbay/portal project, and AB 2397 advanced on a unanimous vote. After the hearing, the committee later took up the bills on call and reported most of them out, including AB 1621, AB 2005, AB 2134, AB 2308, and AB 2397, while AB 1838 remained tied and AB 2180 was sent forward on a divided vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• As shown on the screen, using the 15th Judicial District as an example, each judicial district's report
• Payment by the bond trust fund is also indicated when applicable.
• Presented in Exhibit 3 on pages 6 and 7 of the report is a summary organized by judicial district.
• Exhibit 4 on page 8... of the report is a summary organized by Judicial District.
• On the bond trust fund, it's been used a number of times. Who pays for that trust fund?

Committee: All LEGISLATIVE JOINT AUDITING

Transcript Highlights:

• The process we use is what termed quasi-judicial in nature.
• So, a little bit about our process: quasi-judicial contested case.
• All public natural resources are held in trust by the state. Okay.
• This is a judicial process, and it rules on evidence.
• You think a declaratory order will be a better vehicle or faster, or not be quasi-judicial.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> District Attorney Judicial District District Attorney Judicial District number<01:52:59.599><c>
• </c> &gt;&gt; Section 157, District Attorney Judicial &gt;&gt; Section 157, District Attorney Judicial
• The judicial designated by footnote.
• </c> Section 321 encapsulates uh judicial Section 321 encapsulates uh judicial letter<02:26:12.000><c
• trust trust wildlife<02:26:50.080><c> natural</c><02:26:50.479><c> resource</c><02:26:50.880><c> trust

Committee: Joint Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• So, just a little bit of an overview: the judicial branch's mission The judicial branch's mission is
• We have two one-county districts: the Second Judicial District in Ramsey and the Fourth Judicial District
• body for the judicial branch.
• body for the judicial branch.
• District in Ramsey and the Judicial District in Ramsey and the Fourth<00:03:34.920><c> Judicial</c><

Committee: House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law

Transcript Highlights:

• We believe we can trust that if we were the ones in front of them, that they would look at the facts
• And you're asking us to get rid of... ...promotes and maintains the public's trust in us.
• of this because once there was a legislator who was accused and then, even though they didn't lose trust
• The executive branch and judicial branch cannot make a determination as to our process.
• It was a very quasi-judicial proceeding where everybody—it's in my brain.

Committee: House Judiciary, Rules and Administration

Transcript Highlights:

• Impulse is a trusted distributor of technical heart... ...care and technology.
• We're a trusted distributor. We were HUB-certified in 2008. We were HUB-certified in 2008.
• We're licensed to build, trusted to restore, and proven to lead.
• And if the judicial branch of government does what...
• Government, the judicial branch of government.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, involving state officials in federal immigration enforcement undermines trust in the judicial
• What they do, almost every time, is erode trust.
• We're taking steps in order to rebuild trust.
• The status quo of the judicial system is lopsided.
• It drains judicial resources.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on the Judiciary

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on several Judiciary bills, with the largest portion focused on S. 1178/H. 2052 to reduce mass incarceration and end life without parole. People incarcerated at MCI Framingham, MCI Norfolk, and NCCI Gardner described personal growth, rehabilitation, restorative justice work, family separation, and the belief that parole eligibility after long sentences would better reflect public safety and human development. Speakers emphasized that life without parole removes hope and can undermine rehabilitation, while supporters argued that many lifers are older, less likely to reoffend, and could contribute positively if given a chance at parole review. Committee members did not take votes during the hearing. The committee also heard testimony on S. 1139 to restore the statute of limitations for wrongful death claims involving tobacco use, with Sen. Keenan explaining that a recent SJC decision had cut off claims where the injured person did not sue within three years before death. He said the bill would restore families’ ability to seek redress in cases involving long-latency tobacco harms like COPD. Another major topic was S. 1205, which would add abusive litigation to the definition of coercive control in domestic violence law; Sen. Michael Moore said the bill would stop abusers from using repeated court filings to harass and financially burden survivors. The committee also took up S. 1114 on automatic record sealing, with Sen. Friedman and others arguing that the current petition-based process is slow, burdensome, and disproportionately harms people with criminal records, especially Black and Latino residents. Testimony also supported H. 1965/S. 1132 on compensation for wrongful conviction, with advocates and sponsors describing a faster administrative claims process, transitional support, and higher compensation without the current cap. Sen. Payano testified for S. 1241 to expand educational programming for incarcerated emerging adults, saying education reduces recidivism and improves reentry outcomes. A substantial portion of the hearing focused on S. 2522, an update to Massachusetts’ shield law for reproductive and gender-affirming care. Sen. Friedman, the Attorney General’s office, and DPH Commissioner Robbie Goldstein said the bill is needed to strengthen protections against out-of-state legal attacks, protect patient and provider data, clarify enforcement authority, and add a state-level EMTALA-style emergency care requirement. Committee members asked detailed questions about prescription labeling, the prescription monitoring program, attorney discipline, custody and full faith and credit issues, and whether the bill’s enforcement language could create unintended limits or conflicts. The Attorney General’s office said it would provide follow-up written testimony on several technical questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• The task force is grateful for the legislature's trust, confidence, and support over the past several
• I trusted the system. I submitted to a rape kit. I trusted the system.
• Whether survivors are socializing with friends, seeking safe transportation home, or simply trusting
• My intent with a committee substitute is as follows: one, to require the Texas Judicial Council to be
• It's been about six or eight years since it was looked at by the Judicial Council.

Bills: HB75 , HB108

Committee: Senate Criminal Justice

Summary: The committee heard a series of criminal justice and public safety bills, with most measures focused on tougher penalties, victim protections, and procedural changes. Bills discussed included HB 75, requiring magistrates to make written findings when denying probable cause despite believing an arrestee committed an offense; HB 413, limiting pretrial detention so it cannot exceed the maximum jail term for the charged offense, with competency-related exceptions; HB 1422, expanding sexual assault survivor protections and increasing penalties for certain sexual offenses and voyeurism; HB 2073, increasing penalties for violating protective orders or bond conditions while armed; HB 2593, raising indecent assault penalties against elderly or disabled victims; HB 108, enhancing punishment when body armor is used during violent crimes; HB 3816, expanding cruelty-to-livestock offenses to include unlawful controlled-substance administration; HB 2854, requiring parole officers to notify hospitals or law enforcement when violent parolees visit hospital premises; HB 1871, increasing punishment for attempted capital murder of a peace officer and making such offenders ineligible for parole; HB 3463, clarifying notice methods in theft-of-service cases; HB 2348, allowing video-recorded depositions of elderly or disabled witnesses; HB 2594, expanding venue options for cybercrime and digital theft prosecutions; HB 2761, clarifying that children cannot be deemed to consent to prostitution-related offenses; HB 3185, authorizing administrative subpoenas in cybercrime investigations; HB 2017, increasing penalties for certain intoxication manslaughter cases involving undocumented immigrants with prior DWI convictions; HB 2306, making certain trafficking offenses ineligible for parole; HB 1607, allowing a rear-only license plate when a vehicle lacks a front bracket; HB 1828, creating a legislative leave pool for TDCJ correctional officers; and HB 3664, requiring prospective grand jurors to complete training and proposing additional changes to grand jury procedure in a future substitute. The committee also took up HB 3073, the Summer Willis Act, which would clarify consent in sexual assault law and address intoxication-related incapacity; the committee substitute narrowed the language to situations where the perpetrator knows the other person cannot consent because of intoxication or impairment, while removing withdrawal-of-consent and “reasonably should know” language from the House version. Several bills were laid out with committee substitutes adopted, including HB 3463, HB 2594, HB 3073, and HB 3073’s substitute, and most bills were left pending after no invited or public testimony or after hearing testimony. Public testimony was especially extensive on HB 3073, with survivors, advocates, and prosecutors supporting broader consent language, while some prosecutors said the substitute was an improvement but still favored the House version’s broader protections. HB 3664 drew significant opposition from district attorneys, who argued that mandatory transcription or recording of grand jury testimony would be costly, chill grand juror questioning, and complicate timely presentations; concerns were also raised about new-evidence requirements and grand jury shopping. No final votes were taken on the bills discussed in the transcript, and the committee recessed partway through to return to the floor before continuing its hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Additionally, the bill requires the same disclosure for candidates seeking nomination or election to judicial
• requires the same disclosure of dual citizenship for candidates seeking nomination or election to judicial
• So, if you could—yes, yes, appreciate it, yep—so to protect the integrity of Florida's judicial system
• First, we'll take up tab two members, Senate Bill 192 on patient funds held in trust by chiropractic
• We will now go to tab 9 and take up Senate Bill 1000 on trust fund interest for purposes approved by

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met and took up a series of bills, beginning with SB 620, which would require candidates for federal, state, county, district, judicial, and school board offices to disclose any citizenship in countries other than the United States. The bill was presented as a transparency measure, with one opponent waiving time, and it was reported favorably on an 8-0 vote. The committee then heard SB 1396 on litigation financing consumer protection. Supporters from the Florida Justice Reform Institute, American Tort Reform Association, and U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform argued the bill would add transparency, limit funder control, and require disclosure of foreign entities involved in litigation funding. Opponents, including the Florida Justice Association, argued the bill would create strategic advantages for defendants and could affect discovery and settlement dynamics. The bill passed 7-2. The committee also approved SB 192, removing a $1,500 cap on patient funds chiropractors may hold in trust; SB 888, limiting indemnity and insurance requirements in design-professional contracts; CS/SB 332, creating a temporary closed-meeting exemption for pre-suit Burt Harris litigation strategy discussions; SB 820, requiring quarterly reporting on problem-solving courts; SB 1500, updating uncontested probate procedures; SB 1224, making fraudulent entry into rental dwellings a third-degree felony; and SB 1000, setting a floor and ceiling for interest rates on law firm trust accounts. Each of these bills was reported favorably, with broad support and little or no opposition. The committee also advanced CS/SB 694, which would compensate the descendants of the Groveland Four. Senator Bracey Davis described the bill as a final step in addressing the wrongful convictions, deaths, and long-term harm suffered by Charles Greenlee, Walter Irvin, Samuel Shepard, and Ernest Thomas. Family members and advocacy groups testified in support, urging the state to complete its acknowledgment of wrongdoing with monetary compensation. An amendment was adopted to divide any appropriation equally among the four families. The bill passed unanimously. Finally, SB 144 creating a public records exemption for personal information of Judicial Qualifications Commission employees and their families was approved 9-1. Several members also requested to be recorded as voting in the affirmative on specific bills before the committee adjourned.