Transcript Highlights:

• Rodriguez Ramos relating to the medical accuracy and informational materials given to a woman seeking an abortion
• Rodriguez Ramos relating to the regulation of an abortion-related matters and to the repeal of certain
• laws prohibiting abortion for the Committee on State Affairs.

Transcript Highlights:

• Clinical-based abortions.
• Speaker and Chairman, $3 million more for abortions.
• Thousand clinically-assisted abortions in the state of New Mexico last year. Yes. Yes.
• Six abortion clinics and trying to build more in a state with 21,000 abortions, and it is a decline from
• Four percent, up to four percent of their work may involve abortions.

Transcript Highlights:

• One proposed rule with amendments to federal hospital conditions of participation would ban hospitals
• As of this year, 27 states across the country have banned access to care for transgender minors, many
• of those bans are in litigation.
• I am now seeing families that moved from states where youth care was banned.
• programs that we could really look to, for example, some of the uncompensated care funds in the abortion

Transcript Highlights:

• One proposed rule with amendments to federal hospital conditions of participation would ban hospitals
• As of this year, 27 states across the country have banned access to care for transgender minors; many
• of those bans are in litigation.
• I am now seeing families that moved from states where youth care was banned.
• programs that we could really look to, for example, some of the uncompensated care funds in the abortion

Summary: The joint hearing focused on access to gender-affirming care in California, with opening remarks emphasizing the state’s legal protections, the importance of decorum, and the impact of federal actions on transgender, gender-diverse, and intersex Californians. The Department of Justice, Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC), and Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) described current state protections, including nondiscrimination rules, privacy and shield laws, Medi-Cal and commercial coverage requirements for medically necessary care, and ongoing litigation challenging federal executive orders, proposed rules, and HHS actions that could restrict care or threaten provider participation in Medicare and Medicaid. Officials also noted that California continues to oppose federal proposals through lawsuits and public comments, and that the state is preparing strategies if those proposals are finalized. Members asked about hospital closures or pauses in care, continuity of care, provider network adequacy, whether additional legislation or funding is needed, and how the state can better track access and enforce existing protections. DMHC said it monitors complaints and independent medical reviews, but does not have a specific provider category for gender-affirming care and does not collect utilization data by service type; DHCS said Medi-Cal covers medically necessary gender-affirming care and that federal proposals are not yet final. Finance staff said the previously approved $15 million allocation is still being implemented through Covered California. The second panel heard from a physician, clinic leaders, parents, and a transgender youth about how families and providers navigate access to care. Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy described the history of transgender medical care, the role of puberty blockers and hormones, and said minors need parental consent for medical interventions, while emphasizing that care should be individualized and that supportive parents improve outcomes. She also described the closure of the Children’s Hospital Los Angeles youth program and the difficulty of rebuilding care in private practice, including insurance contracting barriers and inadequate reimbursement. J.M. Jaffe of Lyon Martin Community Health Services said the clinic has expanded to serve minors after hospital programs closed, but that the shift has created major financial strain and increased demand, and asked for a $26 million state investment to stabilize transgender health services. Parents and youth described delays, cancellations, and uncertainty at Kaiser, Stanford, UCSF, and Rady Children’s, along with the emotional and medical consequences of interrupted care. One parent said TRICARE stopped covering her son’s care after federal changes and that Rady later closed its clinic; her family urged California to backfill lost access and funding. A 16-year-old trans student and other witnesses argued that California should remain a reliable source of care and that current protections are not enough without funding, provider support, and stronger enforcement.

Transcript Highlights:

• One proposed rule with amendments to federal hospital conditions of participation would ban hospitals
• As of this year, 27 states across the country have banned access to care for transgender minors; many
• of those bans are in litigation.
• I am now seeing families that moved from states where youth care was banned.
• programs that we could really look to, for example, some of the uncompensated care funds in the abortion

Summary: The joint hearing focused on access to gender-affirming care in California, with members of the Senate and Assembly budget subcommittees hearing first from the Department of Justice, Department of Managed Health Care, and Department of Health Care Services. State officials described California’s legal protections against discrimination, privacy protections, shield laws, and Medi-Cal and commercial plan coverage requirements for medically necessary gender-affirming care. They also outlined ongoing litigation and advocacy against federal actions and proposed rules that could restrict care, including challenges to executive orders, HHS declarations, and federal reimbursement rules, as well as a temporary restraining order protecting care at Rady Children’s Hospital. Committee members pressed the agencies on why some hospitals that had stopped providing care had not been sued, how the state measures network adequacy and equitable access, whether the $15 million previously allocated for gender-affirming care had been used, and what additional statutory changes might be needed. DMHC and DHCS said they regulate health plans rather than providers directly, rely on complaints and independent medical review to address denials or delays, and do not track utilization or have a specific provider category for gender-affirming care. DOJ said it is focused on the federal government as the source of pressure on hospitals and providers, while members discussed possible shield-law expansions and, if federal rules are finalized, the possibility of state-only funding to preserve access. The second panel featured a physician, clinic leaders, parents, and a transgender teen describing how families navigate care and the effects of hospital closures and insurance barriers. Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy gave a history of transgender health care, described puberty blockers and hormones as established treatments, and said minors need parental consent for medical interventions. J.M. Jaffe of Lyon Martin Community Health Services said community clinics are absorbing patients after hospital programs closed and asked for $26 million in state funding to expand capacity. Parents and youth testified about delays, out-of-network referrals, lost coverage, and the emotional strain of uncertainty, while also urging the Legislature to stabilize access and protect continuity of care.

Transcript Highlights:

• One proposed rule with amendments to federal hospital conditions of participation would ban hospitals
• As of this year, 27 states across the country have banned access to care for transgender minors, many
• of those bans are in litigation.
• I am now seeing families that moved from states where youth care was banned.
• programs that we could really look to, for example, some of the uncompensated care funds in the abortion

Summary: The joint hearing focused on access to gender-affirming care in California, with opening remarks from the subcommittee chairs emphasizing the importance of protecting transgender, gender-diverse, and intersex Californians and asking for decorum during public comment. The first panel from the Department of Justice, Department of Managed Health Care, and Department of Health Care Services described existing state protections, including nondiscrimination rules, privacy protections, shield laws, and Medi-Cal and commercial coverage requirements for medically necessary gender-affirming care. State officials also outlined ongoing litigation against federal actions and against hospital decisions to end or restrict care, including the Rady Children’s case and challenges to federal proposed rules and declarations affecting Medicaid, Medicare, and provider participation. Members questioned state agencies about why some hospitals that had stopped providing care had not been sued, how network adequacy is measured, whether the state can track actual access to gender-affirming care, and what legislative changes might strengthen protections. DMHC said it monitors complaints and independent medical reviews but does not track gender-affirming care as a separate provider category or collect utilization data, while DHCS said Medi-Cal continues to cover medically necessary care and that the state is preparing for possible federal rule changes. Finance staff said the previously approved $15 million for gender-affirming care was still being implemented through Covered California. The second panel featured a physician, clinic leaders, a parent, and a transgender teen describing how care is delivered and the effects of hospital closures and federal pressure. Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy described the history and medical basis for gender-affirming care, said minors need parental consent for medical interventions, and argued that care should be individualized and supported by families. Providers and families testified that hospital closures and insurance barriers have disrupted continuity of care, forced patients to travel farther, and shifted demand to community clinics that lack sufficient funding and contracting support. Several witnesses asked the Legislature to provide new funding, strengthen insurance enforcement, and stabilize access to care for transgender youth and families.

Transcript Highlights:

• It strengthens protections for sensitive information, bans deceptive practices, and ensures real enforcement
• There are already examples of location data being used to target anti-abortion ads online to folks who
• For another, the bill bans advertising using sensitive data.
• result in huge amounts of information across sectors like health, wellness, fitness, and more being banned
• establishment by requiring a complex opt-in process for nearly all modern advertising and effectively banning

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 20, a prior-authorization measure aimed at exempting certain medications and treatments for seriously mentally ill adults from repeat insurance prior authorization, while also extending prior authorization approvals to three years for chronic maintenance drugs. The sponsor described the bill as the latest in a series of bipartisan prior-authorization reforms and accepted an amendment from the Health Care Authority and the Office of the Superintendent of Insurance to apply the bill to adults only and to cover PBMs in the interagency purchasing collaborative. Supporters, including NAMI New Mexico and state health officials, argued the bill would reduce barriers to needed care, especially for mental health treatment. Opponents from health plans, PBMs, and insurers warned the bill was too broad, lacked clear definitions for serious mental illness and chronic conditions, created patient-safety concerns, and should have a shorter reauthorization period and later implementation date. After committee discussion, the sponsor agreed to work on a committee substitute, and the bill was rolled over for a later meeting. The committee then heard Senate Bill 53, the Chispa data privacy bill, which would impose broad limits on the collection, sale, and use of personal data, require opt-in consent for many uses, strengthen rights to access, correct, and delete data, and create enforcement mechanisms including a private right of action. Supporters from advocacy, women’s, behavioral health, reproductive health, and civil rights groups said the bill was needed to protect sensitive health and location data, prevent surveillance and criminalization, and give New Mexicans real control over their information. Business, technology, insurance, and hospital representatives opposed the bill, arguing it was more restrictive than other states’ privacy laws, would burden small businesses and health-related services, create compliance uncertainty, and risk limiting digital services and innovation. After extensive questioning about data breaches, opt-in consent, nonprofit exemptions, and the bill’s impact on businesses and health care access, a motion to table failed 5-4, and the committee then passed SB 53 on a 5-4 vote. The committee next heard Senate Bill 86, which updates the state’s harassment-by-telephone law to cover electronic communications such as social media, messaging apps, and email. The sponsor and a Las Cruces police chief said the change would modernize an outdated 1967 statute and help law enforcement address harassment and domestic violence through current technology. The bill drew support from the governor’s public safety advisor and the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce, and members asked a few clarifying questions about the wording. The committee approved SB 86 unanimously, 9-0. Finally, the committee began hearing Senate Bill 96, on regulated childcare zoning requirements, using a committee substitute. The sponsor and the Early Childhood Education and Care Department said the bill would reduce confusing zoning and fire-code barriers to opening or expanding child care homes and centers, helping address a statewide shortage of child care slots and supporting working families. The discussion began with the committee substitute and an explanation that the measure is intended to streamline local requirements and expand child care supply.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is a ban on cross-sex hormones and puberty blockers for minors.
• So I think that given that the bill both bans this care and then threatens to defund providers who provide
• Yeah, Chairman, Representative Cooper, the bill already has enforcement mechanisms because it bans a
• I'm aware that this is used, for example, with abortion care. Okay, thank you. Any other questions?
• A ban on surgeries alone is not going to be enough.

Bills: HB2049 , HB2050 , HB2051 , HB2072 , HB2082 , HB2085 , HB2177 , HB2178 , HB2179 , HB2183 , HB2195

Committees: House Health & Human Services , House House Health & Human Services Committee of Reference

Keywords: radiation therapy, particle accelerator, critical access hospitals, patient care, rural healthcare, radiologic technologist, radiologist assistant, radiology, imaging, x-ray, diagnostic x-ray, fluoroscopy, mammography, computed tomography, CT technologist, nuclear medicine technologist, bone densitometry, radiation safety, radiation licensing, scope of practice

Transcript Highlights:

• I KNOW THE UK TRIED TO DO A BAN ON ENCRYPTION, DONALD TRUMP CAME OUT AGAINST IT AND SAID IT WAS NOT THE
• REALLY WHAT WE ARE DOING IS WE ARE NOT GIVING OPEN ACCESS AND IT'S THE STATEMENT THAT WE ARE BANNING
• THIS BILL DOES NOT BAN ENCRYPTION.
• IS PERFORMED WITH STEM CELL PRODUCTS FROM SPECIFIED SOURCES AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY PRODUCT FROM ABORTED
• THEY ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT SOME OF THE IMPLEMENTATION THEY DID LOCALLY LIKE BANNING THE SINGLE USE

Transcript Highlights:

• significantly harder for young people to access birth control, given the state's extreme six-week abortion
• ban.
• Abortion is another example.
• So if a child is going to get an abortion, or a minor child is being treated for a sexually transmitted
• you may know, that the part of the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine is actually developed with aborted

Summary: The committee first took up CS/SB 1606 on patient access to records. The sponsor explained that the bill, as amended, would align Florida law more closely with HIPAA by defining “designated record set,” requiring providers to furnish requested records within set timeframes, allowing a limited extension with notice, and requiring records to be produced in the requested form if readily producible. Several members asked about patient portals, legal representatives, and whether the bill affected meaningful-use rules or post-mortem access. Multiple witnesses opposed the bill, arguing it could create cybersecurity risks, conflict with existing privacy rules, and burden providers; supporters said it would improve patient access and consistency. The committee adopted the amendment and then reported the bill favorably. The committee then considered CS/SB 712 on construction regulations. The bill would direct DEP to establish rules for synthetic turf and limit local governments from banning it if state rules are followed, while also addressing change orders, public works bidding, elevator rails, alarm contractor work, building code updates, spaceport exemptions, permit document limits, and single-trade inspections. Amendments removed the pool and spa contractor provisions and the tall mass timber language. Testimony on the bill centered heavily on the pool industry, with contractors and the Florida Swimming Pool Association opposing expansion of scope to general and building contractors, while some speakers supported other parts of the bill. After adopting the amendments, the committee reported the bill favorably. Finally, the committee heard CS/SB 1288 on parental rights. The bill would allow minors to be tested for STDs without parental consent but require parental consent for treatment, expand parents’ rights to access records and control certain health decisions, and restrict health care services, medical procedures, and biofeedback devices for minors absent consent or an exception. An amendment moved survey and questionnaire provisions into the education code, added an explicit court-order exception, clarified DNA and biofeedback provisions, and added emergency behavioral health exceptions. The committee heard extensive public testimony both for and against the bill, with supporters emphasizing parental authority and opponents warning it could delay STI treatment, mental health care, and other services for vulnerable minors. The transcript ends during public testimony on the bill, before any final committee action is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• So why are they being banned?
• So why are they being banned?
• Bans looks at it.
• You say it's a clear attempted book banning, and do you consider banning just that some people can't
• and do you attempted book Banning and do you consider<06:12:48.040><c> Banning</c><06:12:48.878><c>

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 763, an early bill concerning AED access at athletic events and venues. Representative Morris offered amendment 0743H to clarify the bill by removing charter schools from the language and tying AED placement to American Heart Association guidance, emphasizing that AEDs should be readily accessible within a reasonable walking distance rather than mandated on every field. The amendment and then the bill as amended both passed 17-0, and the bill was reported out as Ought to Pass with Amendment. The committee then considered House Bill 781, requiring school districts to adopt cell phone-free education policies, and a related bill, House Bill 131. HB 781 was amended to include charter public school boards, cover other personal electronic communication devices, require at minimum restrictions on student personal cell phones during class instruction, allow superintendent-approved exceptions for medical or language needs, protect students with medical needs or disabilities under Section 504, and set an effective date of July 1, 2025. Some members argued the amendment was too prescriptive and limited local control, while supporters said it still left districts flexibility outside classroom instruction. The amendment passed 16-1, and the bill then passed Ought to Pass as Amended 16-1. HB 131, described as a mirror bill, was then retained by a 17-0 vote. House Bill 398, a title bill requiring Holocaust and genocide studies to include impacts on people with disabilities, was moved to ITL after Representative Selig reported the genocide commission believed the topic was already being covered. That motion passed 17-0. The committee also agreed to hold several bills for later consideration, including HB 754, HB 1221, HB 360, and HB 699, citing the need for more review or missing copies. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 361, prohibiting mandatory mask policies in schools. Supporters argued the bill would preserve individual choice while preventing statewide or districtwide mandates in future public health emergencies, and cited a Department of Health and Human Services letter saying masks remain effective but decisions should be based on individual choice and risk assessment. Opponents emphasized local control and the need for districts to respond to different public health conditions. The transcript cuts off before the final vote on HB 361 was completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• clearly I'm a Latina, where, you know, Latinos tend to feel very strongly, like, let's hear about abortion
• had, you know, families, you know, in high school and stuff where, you know, girls wanted to have abortions
• always think, like, okay, so are we going to push then now young ladies to stay quiet and go get an abortion
• , we're not going to give that child or a young lady a choice because it's either going to be an abortion
• As far as any worry about increased abortion, there have been studies...

Summary: The committee first took up SB 490 by Senator Umberg, which would require the Department of Health Care Services to investigate allegations of unlicensed sober living or residential recovery facilities within set timelines, issue notices promptly, and conduct follow-up site visits. Supporters, including a Garden Grove councilmember and the League of California Cities, said the bill would improve public safety, clarify enforcement, and address complaints about illegal operations in neighborhoods. County behavioral health representatives opposed the bill, arguing counties lack jurisdiction over these private facilities, could face liability and unfunded workload increases, and should not be pulled into enforcement responsibilities that belong to the state. After extensive discussion about whether the bill creates a county role or merely a pathway for local assistance, the committee passed SB 490 on an 8-0 vote and placed it on call for missing members. The committee then heard SB 381 by Senator Wahab, which would allow adult adoptees, and in some cases descendants of adoptees, to obtain their original birth certificates, create a contact preference form for birth parents, and remove current limits that omit certain birth information from amended certificates. The bill drew strong support from adoptees, birth parents, and advocates who said access to original records is a matter of identity, dignity, and health because it can reveal family medical history and cultural background. Several committee members expressed support for the goal but raised concerns about privacy, the potential emotional impact on birth parents, and whether the contact preference form adequately protects confidentiality. The author and supporters said the bill is narrowly tailored, that the form is nonbinding, and that many birth parents are open to contact; they also noted the bill had been amended to delay implementation and allow public notice. The transcript ends amid continued debate, with members indicating the bill would continue moving forward with further work, but no final vote is shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• clearly I'm a Latina, where, you know, Latinos tend to feel very strongly, like, let's hear about abortion
• had, you know, families, you know, in high school and stuff where, you know, girls wanted to have abortions
• always think, like, okay, so are we going to push then now young ladies to stay quiet and go get an abortion
• , we're not going to give that child or a young lady a choice because it's either going to be an abortion
• As far as any worry about increased abortion, there have been studies—” “I’m going to have you just respond

Committee: Senate Health

Transcript Highlights:

• not fund immunizations, just as the Hyde Amendment protects federal taxpayer dollars from funding abortions
• not fund immunizations, just as the Hyde Amendment protects federal taxpayer dollars from funding abortions
• not fund immunizations, just as the Hyde Amendment protects federal taxpayer dollars from funding abortions
• not fund immunizations, just as the Hyde Amendment protects federal taxpayer dollars from funding abortions
• Vaccine ingredients include heavy metals, animal viruses, aborted fetal cell lines, Polysorbate 80, that

Summary: The House Committee on Education met on April 1 at 2:04 p.m. and first heard HCR 129/HR 125/HD1, which asks state and county transportation and education agencies to work together on pedestrian safety and traffic congestion around Haiku Elementary School. The Department of Education said it stood on its written testimony, and no other testimony was offered on that measure. The committee then took up HCR 173/HR 169/HD1, urging the Department of Health to begin education outreach and vaccination drive efforts at schools with vaccination rates under 30 percent, starting in the 2025-26 school year. The Department of Education and Department of Health both supported the resolution and stood on their written testimony. Support also came from the Hawaii Public Health Institute, Hawaii Nurses Association, the Democratic Party of Hawaii Health Committee, and Free Citizens of Malua. A number of testifiers opposed the measure, arguing that vaccination efforts do not belong in schools, that the proposal would pressure families and undermine parental rights and religious freedom, and that it could create liability and misuse public funds. Several opponents also raised concerns about informed consent, government overreach, and vaccine safety. One supporter, Kye Swan, said vaccines are the way to fight infectious disease and asked the committee to pass the resolution so children could be vaccinated before the school year starts. No vote or final committee action on the resolutions was announced in the portion of the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the idea is to choose childbirth over abortion.
• You know, we're very familiar with good people standing outside of abortion clinics, praying or...
• You know, we're very familiar with good people standing outside of abortion clinics, praying or Thank
• with women before they go in for an abortion.
• They've had quite a good number of successes so far, and I believe, sadly, in this day of most abortions

Bills: SCR17 , SB2104 , SB2155 , SB1428 , SB1250 , SB1651 , SB1794 , SB444 , SB1061 , SB1327 , SB1425 , SB1455 , SB1458 , SB1460 , SB1480 , SB1530 , SB1543 , SB1555 , SB1593 , SB1209 , SB1730 , SB1733 , SB1769 , SB1805 , SB2069 , SB2095 , SB1503

Summary: The Senate began with several ceremonial recognitions, including citations for the Destiny Christian School girls volleyball team and football team for state championships, and for Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Incorporated, in connection with Delta Day at the Capitol and Women’s History Month. Members and guests were welcomed to speak briefly before the chamber returned to its agenda. The chamber then considered a series of bills. SB 444, dealing with hospice handling and disposal of controlled dangerous substances left after a patient’s death, passed 39-0. SB 1327, restoring the Tourism and Recreation Commission’s authority and adding general commission-member requirements, passed 27-12. SB 1061, a mortgage broker fee cleanup bill, passed 38-0. SB 1425, repealing an obsolete health care workforce board, passed 40-0. SB 1455, extending the sunset for the Board of Governors of the Architects, Landscape Architects, and Licensed Interior Designers, passed 28-11 and then also passed the emergency with 38-1. SB 1458, an Attorney General-request bill to align grand jury witness confidentiality statutes, failed 24-14. The Senate also passed SB 1460, which increases penalties for repeat peeping Tom and clandestine recording offenses and makes second or subsequent offenses sex offenses, by a vote of 38-3. SB 1480, creating a youth apprenticeship pilot program, passed 42-0 and then passed the emergency. SB 1530, updating the Oklahoma Research Development Rebate Program and encouraging private partnerships with higher education, passed 36-4. SB 1543, allowing multiple DUI charges within one year to be prosecuted as a single felony case and making related cleanup changes, passed 37-6 after extended debate about diversion, due process, and testing issues. SB 1555, aligning the state definition of intellectual disability with federal standards, passed 42-0, with a later correction noting the final vote as 42-1. SB 1593, updating outdated OSU-Tulsa trustee language, passed 43-0 and then passed the emergency. SB 1730, requiring law enforcement to copy OSBI on sexual offense reports, passed 37-6. SB 1209, which would have excluded Sundays and federal holidays from the eviction filing-to-hearing timeline, failed on a 21-21 tie after debate over landlord rights, service timing, and court delays.

Transcript Highlights:

• Eastern region that could also be designated as a domestic terrorist organization, whether they be an abortion
• provider... ...also be designated as a domestic terrorist organization, whether they be an abortion
• Courts could even ban religious practices if officials decide they violate American principles.
• So I'm 100 percent okay with banning any type of law or practice that does that. ...law or practice that

Summary: The committee first considered CS/SB 536, which updates Florida’s criminal gang statutes to reflect modern gang recruitment and communication methods, including social media and encrypted messaging. Senator Martin said the bill does not criminalize gang membership, but clarifies definitions used for gang-related enhancements and law enforcement investigations. Members raised concerns about the meaning of “observed in the company” of gang members and possible impacts on businesses and bikers; Martin said the language was not intended to reach ordinary business customers and that the bill still requires other criteria. The committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably after debate, with some members supporting it and others warning it was still too broad. The committee also approved CS/SB 762, allowing cross-jurisdictional assignment of conflict capital cases with cost and reporting requirements, after an amendment emphasizing judicial economy and geographic proximity; the bill was described as a cost-saving measure and was reported favorably. CS/SB 1742, creating a new offense for indecent exposure or sexual acts directed at minors under 16, was amended to align with the House version and to cover observing a child for sexual gratification, then reported favorably. CS/SB 1750, increasing penalties and mandatory minimums for serious sex crimes and child sexual abuse material offenses, was amended to restore some current-law provisions and limit reclassification to offenders who were 18 or older at the time of the offense, then reported favorably. The committee also approved CS/SB 1582 on statewide data sharing for secondhand dealer and pawnbroker transactions, along with its companion public-records bill SB 1792, both described as theft-prevention and law-enforcement tools with confidentiality protections and stakeholder support. CS/SB 500, providing FDLE protective security for major-party nominees for statewide constitutional offices, was also reported favorably after a technical amendment. The longest and most contentious discussion was on CS/SB 1632, which would create a process for Florida to designate foreign and domestic terrorist organizations, restrict courts from enforcing foreign or religious law when it conflicts with state or federal law, and bar public funds from supporting designated organizations. Senator Graal said the bill targets conduct, not belief, and creates due-process protections through written findings, public notice, cabinet action, and judicial review. Senator Smith and Senator Polsky repeatedly questioned whether the bill’s use of terms like “promotion” could chill protected speech, academic debate, protest activity, or legal representation, and whether the designation process could be used politically or against religious and advocacy groups. Graal said promotion was meant to cover support for illegal acts, not mere disagreement or academic speech, and said she was open to clarifying language. Numerous speakers opposed the bill, arguing it was vague, unconstitutional, and likely to be used against Muslim communities, students, nonprofits, and dissenting political speech; a few supporters argued it was needed for public safety and to prevent state support for terrorism. The committee did not take a final vote on CS/SB 1632 in the portion provided, and the transcript ends during public testimony on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• the following measures: HB7 by Leach, relating to prohibitions on the manufacture and provision of abortion-inducing
• I'm referring the prohibitions on the manufacturing and provision of abortion-inducing drugs to State

Bills: SB 2 , SB 5 , SB 10 , SB 9 , SB 7 , SB 17 , SB 4 , HB17 , HB7 , HB7 , HB15 , HB15 , HB27 , HB1 , HB7 , HB15 , HB18 , SB9 , SB7 , SB17 , SB4 , HB17 , HB27 , HB1 , SB8 , HCR13 , SB2 , SB5 , SB10

Transcript Highlights:

• And quite honestly, this will also keep people from aborting babies.
• And quite honestly, this will also keep people from aborting babies.
• And quite honestly, this will also keep people from aborting babies.
• </c> uh keep uh people from aborting babies. uh keep uh people from aborting babies.
• </c> and so they'll just decide to abort and so they'll just decide to abort them.<00:55:15.920><c> This

Transcript Highlights:

• Yesterday, the state of New York became the first state in the nation to ban, through executive order
• Yesterday, the state of New York became the first state in the nation to ban, through executive order
• But I remember back when we're having the abortion issue and the Supreme Court kind of shocked...
• You know, you can ban something, but are you sure it's not happening?
• I mean, a lot of schools are banning cell phones and other computational devices in classes.

Committee: Joint Artificial Intelligence and Data Center Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> and got it through to ban and got it through to ban over-the-counter<03:24:49.200><c> rape</c><03
• Five, six, seven, eight pro-abortion rights bills in a row.
• but two, three pro-abortion rights bills in<03:25:28.080><c> a</c><03:25:28.239><c> row.
• It would abortion rights bills in a row.
• Not a right-to-work bill, not an abortion bill, not a gun bill.

Committee: House Executive Departments and Administration