Transcript Highlights:

• I do wish I had heard more from my colleagues over the last four years when the take care clause was
• necessary for law enforcement, because we simply don't have the tools, Senator, to be able to do the reverse

Committees: Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee , Senate Subcommittee on Surface Transportation, Freight, Pipelines, and Safety

Keywords: Committee, Transportation, aviation safety, confirmation, Lieutenant Commander, Deputy Secretary, Bradbury, Hafensteiner, aircraft incidents

Summary: The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation convened to consider the promotion of Coast Guard Lieutenant Samuel Hafensteiner to Lieutenant Commander and the nomination of Stephen Bradbury as Deputy Secretary of Transportation. The meeting highlighted ongoing concerns regarding aviation safety, especially in light of recent aircraft incidents. Members discussed the critical need for knowledgeable leadership within the Department of Transportation to address these safety challenges effectively. Mr. Bradbury's background as a former General Counsel of the Department was presented as a strong asset for the role he seeks.

Transcript Highlights:

• They violate the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution, which dictates that— They violate
• That's a Supremacy Clause issue.
• So the first thing I mentioned was the Supremacy Clause of the United States.
• Very likely, yes, violates the Supremacy Clause. What the hell we do in here? I mean...
• The federal supremacy clause and EPA primacy are not the same thing.

Committee: House Natural Resources & Environment

Transcript Highlights:

• Automobile policies have long included this clause.
• Today, they suggest you check your policy to be sure it has an appraisal clause.
• The nine claims were resolved by using the appraisal clause in 2024.
• The appraisal clause protects both policyholders and insurance companies with transparency.
• I urge this committee to please pass this appraisal clause bill.

Bills: SB458 , SB819 , SB1238 , SB1642 , SB1643 , SB1644 , SB1791 , SB1810 , SB1824 , SB1825 , SB758 , SB1455 , SB1706

Committee: Senate Business & Commerce

Transcript Highlights:

• A sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered pursuant to Clause 8 of Rule 20.
• Pursuant to Clause 8 of Rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.
• Further proceedings on this question will be postponed pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule 1.
• Further proceedings on this question will be postponed pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule 1.
• The objection motion to reconsider is laid upon the table, pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20.

Bills: SB5 , HR165 , HR53 , HR55 , HR54

Keywords: immigration, detention, theft, security, enforcement, Laken Riley Act, deportation, mandatory detention, ICE detainer, Department of Homeland Security, DHS, noncitizen, alien, inadmissibility, burglary, larceny, shoplifting, assault on law enforcement, serious bodily injury, parole

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, the emergency clause on Section B, can you tell me about that? Why this is a subject..."
• "The emergency clause on Section B, can you tell me about that? Why this is a sudden emergency?
• My guess is that all three of these are going to be combined into an HCS with an emergency clause that
• Since then, unfortunately, that ruling has been reversed, but I want to be especially clear about something
• It was reversed due to a lack of evidence, and it did not take up the actual question about the constitutionality

Committees: House Emerging Issues , House Emerging Issues and Professional Registration

Transcript Highlights:

• Without new housing to reverse that trend, we'll struggle to maintain level growth.
• Without new housing to<00:12:50.800><c> reverse</c><00:12:51.200><c> that</c><00:12:51.519><c> trend,
• </c><00:12:51.920><c> we'll</c><00:12:52.320><c> struggle</c><00:12:52.560><c> to</c> to reverse that
• trend, we'll struggle to to reverse that trend, we'll struggle to maintain<00:12:53.360><c> level</c
• that says we're not going to the clause that says we're not going to force<00:30:06.960><c> things</

Bills: HF3902 , HF3895

Committee: House Housing Finance and Policy

Keywords: housing tax credit, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, qualified projects, taxpayer contributions, greater Minnesota, zoning, housing, local government, multifamily development, affordable housing, land use, urban development

Transcript Highlights:

• It's currently $50 million, taking it to $60 million of general revenue funding, and the Senate reversed
• United States rules in a matter that would oppose a state constitutional provision, that the supremacy clause
• Supreme Court, said you may not do X, what does the Supremacy Clause dictate in such a situation?
• I also agree with you that the Supremacy Clause is what determines matters such as this.
• It is completely different than the situation we have in Missouri, so the Supremacy Clause would not

Summary: The House convened with prayer, approved the House Journal by a 107-1 vote, and then spent much of the day on introductions of guests, family members, interns, and public servants. Members recognized visitors including family of legislators, a park ranger honored for life-saving work, substance-use treatment advocates, nonprofit and apprenticeship program representatives, students, and staff. The chamber also received committee reports and Senate messages, including a conference committee appointment on House Bill 2818 and fiscal review reports recommending passage of Senate Bill 1020 and Senate Bill 1062. The main floor action centered on the state budget, especially House Bill 2 on public education. The budget chair explained the conference report as providing $8.4 billion for K-12 and the Office of Childhood, with disputes over funding sources and the foundation formula. Several members argued the bill underfunded schools by about $190 million and objected to using blind pension and projected ARPA/lottery-related funds; others defended the budget as record-level funding and emphasized that the total education dollars were unchanged, only the funding mix differed. A substitute motion to reject the conference report and send the bill back to conference failed 62-89, and the conference report on House Bill 2 was then adopted 83-68; the bill was third read and passed 83-68. The House then adopted and passed House Bill 3 on higher education, after debate over a proposed performance-based funding model and language directing the department to develop a new formula by the end of the year. Members generally supported keeping funding flat this year while studying a longer-term model. House Bill 4, covering Revenue and Transportation, was adopted 128-21 and passed 127-27, with discussion of rural roads funding and transportation investments. The House also took up House Bill 5 on the Office of Administration and IT consolidation/accountability, with the sponsor describing it as the central state-government operations bill; debate on that measure began before the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Just so you know, I am adopting an urgency clause to the bill, given the urgent need for clarity in the
• Motion: do pass as amended, adding an urgency clause to appropriations. Kalra? Aye. Dixon? Wicks?
• And then goes on, the ombudsperson will be neither used nor useful if denied requesters are called reverse
• the Eighth Amendment in terms of excessive fines; and it flips the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause
• Conan's family was able to raise enough money to appeal and ultimately reverse the decision, but this

Committee: House Judiciary

Summary: The committee first heard AB 2, which would impose enhanced financial penalties on large social media companies when negligence proven in court causes harm to children and teens. The author and supporters, including Common Sense Media and education and child advocacy groups, argued that social media algorithms and design features amplify harmful content and that existing remedies are not enough to deter misconduct. Opponents from TechNet, CCIA, the Chamber of Commerce, EFF, and others warned the bill was vague, could chill content moderation and encryption, invite litigation, and be preempted by Section 230. Several members raised concerns about defining “harm,” but the bill passed on a roll call vote and was sent onward. The committee then took up AB 282, which would allow landlords and housing providers to establish preferences for tenants who use housing vouchers or other rental assistance, clarifying that such preferences are not unlawful source-of-income discrimination. Supporters from housing authorities, local governments, AARP, legal aid groups, and housing nonprofits said the bill would help voucher holders find units and improve voucher utilization. There was no opposition testimony, and the bill passed with a roll call vote and was sent to Appropriations. Next was AB 882, dealing with court reporter availability and the use of electronic recording in certain cases when an official court reporter is unavailable. The author and supporters, including court reporter and labor representatives, said the bill is a temporary, narrowly tailored response to a shortage while preserving accurate records. Opponents from consumer attorneys, defense counsel, the Judicial Council, and others argued the bill was too narrow, could harm access to justice, and should be expanded or revised. Members from both parties expressed mixed views but generally supported continuing the conversation; the bill passed and was placed on call. The committee also heard AB 325 on algorithmic price fixing, which would update antitrust law to address collusion through pricing software and digital tools. Supporters said the bill targets modern forms of cartel behavior and closes loopholes that let companies coordinate prices through algorithms. Opponents from the Chamber of Commerce, Civil Justice Association, TechNet, retailers, hospitals, and others argued the conduct is already illegal, the bill is overbroad, and its definitions and burden-shifting provisions need work. Members requested clarifications to key definitions and pleading standards, but the bill passed as amended and was placed on call. The committee then briefly heard AB 935, which would strengthen civil rights data collection and transparency, especially for educational settings; it had no opposition, passed, and was placed on call. Finally, AB 67 was presented to let the Attorney General enforce the Reproductive Privacy Act and seek penalties against local governments that interfere with abortion access. Supporters framed it as an enforcement tool to protect reproductive rights, while opponents from California Family Council and others denounced it as expanding state power to protect abortion access; the transcript cuts off during that item.

Transcript Highlights:

• I was called out to a home of an elderly lady to do a signing for a reverse mortgage.
• husband is given notice and then has an opportunity to assert paternity, as opposed to creating the reverse
• there is a higher level of protection recognized and applied by the court, end quote, an ambiguous clause

Committee: House Civil Law and Procedure

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 718, which would limit liability for landowners who allow free use of private property for aeronautical activities at non-public airports. The author said the bill was modeled on Arkansas law and was intended to help private airstrips. After brief questions about fees and the effective date, the bill was reported favorably without objection. House Bill 134, dealing with material harmful to minors online, was then amended to clarify that interactive computer services may not deliver harmful material to minor accounts they created, while removing algorithm restrictions and cure language; it was reported as amended. House Bill 410, which would require notification before recording direct in-person conversations, drew substantial testimony. The author said the bill was aimed at privacy concerns raised by wearable AI devices and hidden recording tools, and the adopted amendments changed the measure from consent to notification and added exceptions for first responders, evidence preservation, civil or administrative proceedings, criminal matters, and recordings in one’s own residence. Supporters said the bill protected ordinary people from secret recordings, while opponents warned it could chill family-law recordings, citizen journalism, HOA disputes, and other legitimate uses. The bill was ultimately reported as amended. House Bill 318, which would reduce the presumption of paternity period from 300 days to 150 days, was heavily criticized by family-law practitioners and a law professor who said the current 300-day rule tracks gestation and that shortening it would shift burdens onto mothers; the author then voluntarily deferred the bill. A companion study resolution, HCR 19, directing the Louisiana State Law Institute to study the presumption of parentage, was reported favorably. The committee also heard House Bill 970 on competing custody orders. The author described cases where different courts issued conflicting custody rulings for the same child, but judges and attorneys raised concerns about the bill’s “earliest order controls” rule, its effect on out-of-state orders, protective orders, and the lack of a clear mechanism for judges to discover prior orders. After testimony from judges and committee discussion about possible fixes and a unified filing system, the bill was voluntarily deferred. House Bill 163, another private-airstrip liability bill, was reported favorably, and House Bill 170 and House Bill 194, both dealing with construction/design professional contracts and preemptive periods, were reported as amended or favorably after testimony that they would align design-professional rules with contractor rules and keep Louisiana projects under Louisiana law. House Bill 254, limiting acts of donation of motor vehicles to certain relatives and charities, was reported as amended after discussion about tax treatment and possible loopholes. Finally, the committee began House Bill 485, a proposed constitutional amendment declaring parental rights fundamental and subjecting government restrictions to strict scrutiny. Supporters argued it would protect parents’ authority over children’s upbringing, education, care, and control, while opponents said the language was overly broad and could complicate child welfare, public health, and school safety measures. The author said the amendment would not protect abuse or neglect and was meant to ensure government interference meets strict scrutiny, but the transcript cuts off before final action on the measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• I was called out to a home of an elderly lady to do a signing for a reverse mortgage.
• husband is given notice and then has an opportunity to assert paternity, as opposed to creating the reverse
• there is a higher level of protection recognized and applied by the court, end quote, an ambiguous clause

Bills: HCR6 , HCR19 , HB81 , HB134 , HB154 , HB163 , HB170 , HB194 , HB254 , HB318 , HB410 , HB473 , HB485 , HB718 , HB970

Committee: House Civil Law and Procedure

Keywords: HCR 6, House Concurrent Resolution 6, successions, intestate succession, testate succession, disinheritance, disinherison, forced heirship, forced heir, legitime, estranged heir, estranged child, inheritance, estate planning, wills, testaments, Civil Code Article 1617, Civil Code Article 1618, Civil Code Article 1619, Civil Code Article 1620

Transcript Highlights:

• No state has reversed these privileges once they've been received.
• It didn't come with a $750,000 emergency clause. I mean, it didn't come with the appropriation.
• I've looked at reversions. I've looked at a number of things.

Committee: House House Health & Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• The genocide convention, ratified by the U.S., binds our state through the Supremacy Clause.
• This bill is a vital step in reversing the disproportionate incarceration of Black and brown youth.
• This bill is a vital step in reversing the disproportionate incarceration of Black and brown youth.

Summary: The committee began with a work session from the State Investment Board, where staff described the board’s structure, $230 billion in assets under management, and its mandate to maximize returns at a prudent level of risk for pension and other state funds. They reviewed long-term performance, noting strong historical returns and explaining that the board generally invests public equities passively through low-cost index funds. Members also discussed sustainability practices, including ESG integration, proxy voting, climate and DEI blueprints, and the board’s view that divestment or asset-class restrictions can reduce returns and increase costs. Senators asked about deferred compensation, legislative influence over investment policy, and digital assets; staff said the board is slow-moving and that any major change would be studied carefully. The public hearing then focused on SB 5439, which would prohibit new thermal coal investments beginning in 2026 and require full divestment by 2030, with limited exceptions. Supporters argued coal is a poor long-term investment and a major climate and health risk, and several said the bill still gives the board flexibility to retain holdings in companies transitioning to clean energy. The committee also heard testimony on SB 6109, which would bar investments in private detention facilities and require divestment by 2030; supporters said state money should not profit from immigrant detention, while staff confirmed the board currently holds a small investment in Geo Group. SB 6304 would require responsible investment principles for the State Investment Board, including consideration of human rights, environmental degradation, corruption, and related risks, along with proxy voting guidelines and annual reporting. Testimony in favor emphasized ethical investing, climate risk, and avoiding complicity in human rights abuses, while board staff had earlier said they view such decisions through an investment-risk lens rather than a values-based lens. The committee also heard Substitute SB 5945, which would exclude most offenses committed before age 18 from counting as strikes under the state’s persistent offender law and would allow retroactive resentencing for affected people, with exceptions for first- and second-degree murder and serious sex offenses. Staff said the substitute would likely affect fewer cases than the original bill, with estimates ranging from about 10 to 24 resentencings. Public defense, prosecutors, and sheriffs’ representatives raised concerns about workload, victim impacts, and retroactive application, while supporters and pro bono providers said they were prepared to help with resentencing and reentry support. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• there's been an administrative rule passed, but we know that administrative rules can be easily reversed
• And again, we know that there has been an administrative rule that can be easily reversed with the stroke
• And then finally, at the end of page four, we have a savings clause, and that simply is something we

Bills: SJR 1 , SB 9 , SB 40 , SJR 36 , SJR 1 , SJR 5 , SB 9 , SB 40 , SR 61 , SR 91 , SR 97 , SR 103 , SR 104 , SR 112 , SR 115 , SR 116 , SCR 16 , SB 26 , SB 26

Transcript Highlights:

• So that is all the amendments and the committee report. reverse the decision made by the reverse the
• Safety<03:35:32.640><c> clause.
• I know we discuss safety clauses and petition clauses quite a bit up here on many bills, but I totally
• :39:08.000><c> petition</c> discuss safety clauses and petition discuss safety clauses and petition clauses
• I know we discuss safety clauses and petition clauses quite a bit up here on many bills, but I totally

Transcript Highlights:

• Pursuant to clause one of rule one, the journal stands approved.
• clause one of rule one, the journal stands<02:07:15.679><c> approved.
• Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.
• Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.
• Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.

Bills: HR492 , HR499 , HB2056 , SB331

Keywords: immigration, sanctuary jurisdiction, federal compliance, District of Columbia, law enforcement, fentanyl, controlled substances, drug trafficking, public health, research regulations

Transcript Highlights:

• journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the House the approval thereof pursuant to clause
• Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.
• Pursuant to clause 8, rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. rise.
• </c><02:47:52.160><c> Further</c> to clause 8, rule 20. Further to clause 8, rule 20.
• Pursuant to clause 8 of Rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.

Bills: HB4016 , HR4 , HR590 , HB1919 , SB1582 , HB3633

Keywords: defense appropriations, military funding, national security, Department of Defense, fiscal year 2026, House of Representatives, election, Speaker, Clerk, Congress, budget authority, rescission, fiscal policy, government funding, impoundment, Federal Reserve, digital currency, monetary policy, financial services, privacy

Transcript Highlights:

• The rulemaking process has been reversed, and that must stop.
• </c><03:34:16.319><c> and</c> roommaking process has been reversed and roommaking process has been reversed
• Can maybe you can speak to that. >> So, the supremacy clause, I think that's a really good point, and
• Because you're talking about the supremacy clause, Article VI, Section 2 of the Constitution.
• :26.080><c> I</c><03:57:26.160><c> I</c><03:57:26.399><c> think</c> &gt;&gt; So, the supremacy clause

Committee: House Executive Departments and Administration

Transcript Highlights:

• That's a supremacy clause.
• So the first thing I mentioned was the Supremacy Clause of the United States.
• So the first thing I mentioned was the Supremacy Clause of the United States.
• It violates the Supremacy Clause. What the hell are we doing here? I mean...
• The federal supremacy clause and EPA primacy are not the same thing.

Summary: The committee took up public comment on a package of similar local-option bills related to carbon capture and sequestration, including House Bills 5, 6, 497, 498, 501, and 504. The bills would let parishes, or in some cases specific parishes such as Rapides and Livingston, decide by local vote whether Class VI wells, CO2 sequestration, and related pipeline infrastructure could be permitted. The chair grouped the bills together for testimony, adopted a three-minute public comment rule, and noted that the bills were not yet under consideration for a vote during the public-comment portion. Supporters, including Speaker Pro Tem Mike Johnson, parish officials, local activists, and residents, argued that communities affected by carbon capture projects should have a direct voice through local option elections. They said the bills were about self-determination, local control, and allowing residents to decide whether the risks are worth the benefits. Several speakers said their parishes had passed resolutions opposing carbon capture or asking for local choice, while others emphasized concerns about eminent domain, aquifer protection, lack of public understanding, and the need for more information about project impacts and financial benefits. Some supporters also said a local vote would force industry to engage more directly with communities and could improve transparency. Opponents, including representatives of the Department of Conservation and Energy, the Louisiana Chemistry Association, the Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association, and the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry, warned that the bills would create uncertainty, undermine Louisiana’s primacy over Class VI permitting, and invite litigation under federal preemption and the Supremacy Clause. They said the state already has a strict permitting process with public input and technical review, and that allowing parish-by-parish approval could delay or block billions of dollars in investment, jobs, and export-related projects. The department testified that if the state adopted a local-option referendum system, EPA could determine Louisiana was not implementing the program consistently and could move to remove primacy. No committee vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• How do we reverse engineer aging? It's really hard.
• You know, as I get older, I'd like to reverse engineer aging, but it is a difficult scientific question
• How can we reverse inflammaging? There's a lot of potential ways.
• If we can find a drug that will... will reverse or slow down the process, that's wonderful.
• Reverse transgenic models of amyloid deposition.

Bills: HB5 , HJR3 , HB155 , HB513 , HB5 , HB155

Committee: House Public Health

Keywords: dementia, research, health care, Texas Institute, grants, medical breakthroughs, oversight, prevention, funding, healthcare, Texas, autopsy, confidentiality, public records, medical examiner, law enforcement, HB 513, surgical smoke, surgical plume, smoke evacuation

Transcript Highlights:

• And then if you're dismantling it, it should always reverse the process.
• to defend against potential challenges under the contract clause.
• </c> recommend adding a non-impairment clause recommend adding a non-impairment clause to<00:55:59.359
• </c><00:56:04.000><c> I'm</c><00:56:04.280><c> available</c> under the contract clause I'm available
• under the contract clause I'm available for<00:56:05.160><c> questions</c><00:56:06.160><c> okay</c><

Summary: The joint committees on Labor and Technology, Transportation, and Culture and the Arts heard testimony on Senate Bill 396 and Senate Bill 47, then later the Labor and Technology committee took up Senate Bill 136 and Senate Bill 1523. SB 396 drew support from the Metropolitan Planning Organization and others, with a question raised about implementation costs; the director said costs would depend on the scope of the benefit package and the transportation mode involved. The committees recommended passing SB 396 with technical amendments and added appropriation language with a blank amount, and the motion was adopted by recorded votes in both committees. SB 47, which would designate the Lunar New Year as a state holiday, received support from the Office of Collective Bargaining and several individuals, including Charlene Chun, who spoke about family traditions and cultural recognition. Members asked about the cost and whether the day would be a paid day off for state employees; the response was that observance would be subject to collective bargaining. The committees moved SB 47 forward with amendments, noting the collective bargaining and cost issues, and adopted the recommendation by vote. In the Labor and Technology committee, SB 136 on the Iron Workers Stabilization Fund drew strong support from iron workers and related supporters, who argued the bill was about safety, training, and keeping dismantling work within the ironworkers’ trade. Several other unions, including operating engineers, carpenters, laborers, and plumbers and fitters, opposed the bill as too broad and potentially infringing on their jurisdiction. The measure was not decided in the portion provided, but members discussed possible amendments and jurisdictional concerns. SB 1523, which would expand private-sector collective bargaining rights under the Hawaii Employment Relations Act to include independent contractors and others under NLRB jurisdiction, received broad labor support, including from IATSE, AFL-CIO, Hawaii Nurses Association, Unite Here Local 5, and many individual testifiers. Supporters framed it as protecting workers’ rights and strengthening labor protections, while the Hawaii Labor Relations Board warned it could significantly increase workload and require more staffing, space, and operating resources; the board estimated the bill could expand its caseload substantially and suggested an appropriation would likely be needed. The committee then moved on to the next measure, SB 1440, before the transcript ended.