Video & Transcript Research : 'Tenth Amendment'

Page 3 of 500
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House Agriculture Finance and Policy Committee 3/18/26

Agriculture Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • to your bill as amended. to your bill as amended.
  • >> As<00:30:02.159> amended. >> As amended. >> As amended.
  • Any questions for members on that oral amendment before you vote on amending?
  • Oral amendment passes. Chair Hansen, your bill is amended. >> Thank you. Mr.
  • you vote on amending? you vote on amending? Chair<01:36:46.960> Anderson.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Senate of the 89th Legislature Feb 19th, 2025 at 11:00 am

Texas Senate Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • Members, the following amendment. Secretary will read the amendment.
  • Floor amendment number one by Huffman. Senator Huffman, you're recognized on your amendment.
  • Hearing none, amendment is adopted. Following amendment, Secretary read the amendment.
  • Floor amendment number two by Huffman. Senator Huffman, you're recognized on your amendment.
  • Hearing none, amendment is adopted. The following amendment, sorry, that's the last one.
WY

Wyoming 2026 Regular Session

House Revenue Committee, February 12, 2026

Revenue

Transcript Highlights:
  • Any amendments?
  • Any<00:17:21.959> amendments? Any amendments? Any amendments?
  • Amendment one.
  • they're all This is amendment they're all This is amendment Amendment<00:40:05.800> two.
  • <00:40:07.200> Amendment Amendment two. Yeah. Okay. Amendment Amendment two. Yeah. Okay.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Criminal Justice May 14th, 2025

Criminal Justice

Transcript Highlights:
  • This is another constitutional amendment that addresses the critical bail issue that we have throughout
  • So what this joint resolution does, if approved by Texas voters, it amends the Constitution to require
  • the denial of bail If approved by Texas voters, it amends the Constitution to require the denial of
  • This constitutional amendment adds insult to injury, and with that, we oppose this SJR. Thank you.
  • I forgot we had a floor amendment, but it actually makes it clearer to your concern.
Bills: SB3073, SJR87
Summary: The Senate Committee on Criminal Justice met with a quorum present and took up three bills tied to bail reform and law enforcement records. Senator Huffman presented SJR 87, a proposed constitutional amendment that would require denial of bail for people accused of certain serious felony offenses if they have a prior conviction for, or are already on bond for, one of those offenses and there is probable cause to believe they committed another listed offense. Supporters said it would give judges a needed tool to detain repeat violent offenders; opponents from the ACLU of Texas and Texas Civil Rights Project argued it would mandate detention without individualized due process and weaken the presumption of innocence. The committee voted 7-1 to report SJR 87 favorably, with Senator Miles voting no. The committee then heard SB 3073, which would require magistrates who find no probable cause after an arrest to enter written findings supporting that determination. Senator Huffman said the bill was a narrow cleanup measure to improve transparency and provide guidance to law enforcement and prosecutors without limiting judicial discretion. With no invited or public testimony, the committee voted 6-1 to report SB 3073 favorably, again with Senator Miles dissenting. Finally, the committee considered SB 781, a committee substitute dealing with law enforcement file management and personnel records. Senator King explained that the bill would standardize policies already used in many Texas cities and under civil service rules, separating public and sealed personnel information while preserving access for criminal defense discovery. Senator Miles raised concerns that sealing exonerated allegations could hide patterns of misconduct and allow problematic officers to move between agencies. The committee adopted the committee substitute and voted 6-1 to report SB 781 favorably, with Senator Miles voting no. The committee then recessed subject to the chair’s call.
WY

Wyoming 2026 Regular Session

House Judiciary Committee, February 16, 2026

Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:
  • Discussion on the bill or amendments. Start with amendments.
  • Further amendments.
  • Further amendments.
  • to<01:43:01.920> the further amendment or an amendment to the further amendment or an amendment
  • Amendment.
Bills: HB0103, HB0070, HB0091
WY

Wyoming 2026 Regular Session

Senate Judiciary Committee, February 16, 2026

Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:
  • Landon Amendment. >> The Landon amendment. >> Is there a second?
  • >> Any other amendments?
  • Is there a second to that amendment? amendment? amendment? >> Second. >> Second.
  • propose that amendment. propose that amendment.
  • That amendment has been adopted. >> Any additional amendments to this bill?
Bills: HB0103, HB0070, HB0091
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • This is another constitutional amendment that addresses the critical bail issue.
  • The amendments are still moving through the process; there's no indication that they're not.
  • So what this joint resolution does, if approved by Texas voters, is amend the Constitution to require
  • I mean, this bill, this constitutional amendment is meant to address...
  • This constitutional amendment adds insult to injury, and with that, we oppose this SJR. Thank you.
Bills: SB3073, SJR87
US
Transcript Highlights:
  • . explain the amendment.
  • On my amendment, yeah.
  • One more amendment. Senator Sanders. Call up Sanders amendment number five.
  • The amendment is agreed to. The amendment is agreed to. Is there anyone else to offer an amendment?
  • I call up amendment number 4. This amendment is simple and straightforward.
Bills: SB163, SB558
Summary: The committee meeting primarily focused on reviewing two significant bills: S558, the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act of 2025, and S163, the Protecting Students on Campus Act. Senator Tim Scott introduced S558, emphasizing its importance in combatting anti-Jewish violence and harassment, and providing the Department of Education with necessary tools to investigate incidents of anti-Semitism on college campuses. The bill sparked a vigorous debate among members who expressed concerns over potential implications for free speech, particularly regarding its definitions of anti-Semitism, and whether it would infringe upon First Amendment rights.