Transcript Highlights:

• adopted adopted and<00:17:29.480> the<00:17:29.559> buyer<00:17:29.840> Association
• <00:17:42.280> to the ability of an estranged parent to the ability of an estranged parent
• So maybe it's, you know, spouse one or parent one and parent two, and you have parent one who knows very
• > you<00:36:17.839> have<00:36:18.079> parent one and parent two and you have parent
• knows very well that parent two one knows very well that parent two never<00:36:20.960> showed

Bills: HF747, HF360

Keywords: corporate governance, shareholder rights, beneficial ownership, defective corporate acts, Minnesota Business Corporation Act, trusts, Uniform Trust Code, probate, estate planning, trust protector, directed trust, investment trust advisor, distribution trust advisor, excluded fiduciary, decanting, power of appointment, revocable trust, irrevocable trust, uneconomic trust, rule against perpetuities

Transcript Highlights:

• , a foster parent, a foster parent, it<00:33:33.480> it<00:33:33.880> it's<00:33:34.080
• we tell the kids or we tell the parents we tell the kids or we tell the parents through<00:34:21.159
• what we have before us when we adopt what we have before us when we adopt amendments<01:23:55.600
• <01:31:12.200> who I don't know the number of parents who I don't know the number of parents
• We use our policies to discuss with our parents.

Bills: HF4407, HF4382

Keywords: child welfare, African American children, racial disproportionality, family preservation, reunification, foster care, kinship care, relative placement, noncustodial parent, guardian ad litem, ombudsperson, Department of Human Services, county social services, active efforts, reasonable efforts, child protection, placement, out-of-home placement, Northstar kinship assistance, data disaggregation

Summary: The Children and Families Committee adopted the April 8 minutes and then took up House File 4407, as amended by the A1 amendment. The amendment, explained by nonpartisan staff, incorporated much of the Senate version of related legislation and made a series of changes: it revised the definition of “disproportionately represented child,” shifted that determination to the Commissioner of Children, Youth, and Families, made technical cross-reference and terminology updates, adjusted training requirements, set the working group to expire December 31, 2027, and added an appropriation for statewide implementation. The committee adopted the A1 amendment and then referred the bill to Ways and Means. Representative Gilman said the bill is intended to preserve the goals of the Minnesota African American Family Preservation Act while addressing operational, legal, and fiscal problems before statewide implementation. He argued for delaying the effective date by one year, shifting case review responsibilities to the state, and providing funding so counties are not left with an unfunded mandate. He also said the bill adds safety measures related to synthetic opioids and other imminent-harm concerns, and that the delay would allow the working group to finish its recommendations and give counties time to prepare. County officials Steve Schmidt of Meeker County/Minnesota Rural Counties and Jenny Mojo of Clay County testified in support of the bill as amended, emphasizing that counties need clearer responsibilities, staffing, training, technology, and dependable funding to implement the law successfully. Rebecca St. George of DCYF said “active efforts” is not absolutely defined and is determined case by case, often with court involvement. Members raised questions about the meaning of active efforts, the bill’s synthetic opioid language, and whether the proposal should apply more broadly rather than within this specific act. A citizen also cautioned that the opioid language should not unintentionally affect families in treatment programs. Representative Hicks warned that the fentanyl provisions could lead to broad removals and create placement problems for teens with substance use disorder, while Representative Gilman responded that the bill includes a rebuttable presumption and is meant to protect children from imminent harm.

Transcript Highlights:

• is adopted. is adopted. Oh.<00:02:22.400> Oh,<00:02:22.520> no. Oh. Oh, no. Oh.
• Now, to the A3 amendment as adopted, any further discussion or questions, members, before we adopt the
• as amended is adopted. as amended is adopted.
• oral amendment to the A3 is adopted. oral amendment to the A3 is adopted.
• amendment as amended is adopted. amendment as amended is adopted.

Bills: HF2136, HF4195, HF4548, HF4432, HF4174, HF3024, HF4389, HF3773

Keywords: youth intervention, grants, community support, early intervention services, nonprofit, Minnesota human services, forecast adjustment, budget forecast, appropriations, Medical Assistance, MinnesotaCare, Health Care Access Fund, general fund, behavioral health, housing support, General Assistance, Minnesota Supplemental Aid, MFIP, DWP, child care assistance

Transcript Highlights:

• between a child and a parent.
• That a child with two parents is always better than a child with one parent is absolute.
• anti-the other parent?
• I just don't understand how zero contact with a parent—an alleged offending parent or brainwashing parent—can
• Lastly, parents can appeal.

Bills: HB168, HB 1044, HB1534, HB1914, HB2240, HB2530, HB3284, HB3395, HB3515, HB3783, HB4034, HB4213, HB168

Keywords: marriage age, minors, family law, void marriage, rights of minors, Texas marriage law, marriage ceremony, authorized officiants, family code, judges, religious leaders, parent-child relationship, Department of Family and Protective Services, legal rights, notice requirements, HB 1914, Texas Family Code, Chapter 156, conservatorship, custody

Transcript Highlights:

• Parents will literally pay a family to emancipate the child so they can marry them, and that is what
• They can arise when parents expect to control the marriage choices of their children.
• Their parents were trying to arrange a marriage, leave and go to another state and circumvent it.
• No parent or child has said that it was unjust.
• Parents fail us when our religious institutions, that we look to for guidance, fail us.

Bills: HB168, HB 1044, HB1534, HB1914, HB2240, HB2530, HB3284, HB3395, HB3515, HB3783, HB4034, HB4213, HB168

Keywords: marriage age, minors, family law, void marriage, rights of minors, Texas marriage law, marriage ceremony, authorized officiants, family code, judges, religious leaders, parent-child relationship, Department of Family and Protective Services, legal rights, notice requirements, HB 1914, Texas Family Code, Chapter 156, conservatorship, custody

Transcript Highlights:

• We believe that by adopting this model here in Texas, we can achieve similar success and ensure that
• This bill amends the government code to prohibit a municipality or a county that has not adopted civil
• This affects the success of working parents in the state.
• In short, El Paso's working parents need our help.
• single parents.

Bills: HB1654, HB1691, HB2545, HB2652, HB3799, HB4144, HB5008

Keywords: peace officers, firefighters, employment protection, worker's compensation, job security, maximum medical improvement, government employment, firefighter cancer benefits, emergency medical technicians, compensation claims, cancer exposures, firefighting hazards, workforce training, rural development, grant program, job-specific training, Texas Workforce Commission, child care, single-parent, subsidized

Transcript Highlights:

• and also the prospective parents.
• The placing child for adoption should receive the reports within 45 days, and the prospective adoptive
• And when you look at these case files and adoptions, adoptive families get $400 a month for adoption
• they don't get adopted... ...until they're 5, or at 10 and not adopted till they're 12.
• And I guess if that was then found out, could that change how the adoptive parent, like their decision

Bills: SB500, SB1522, SB1137, SB1266

Keywords: SB 500, Texas adoption law, Family Code, DFPS, Department of Family and Protective Services, child-placing agency, prospective adoptive parents, adoption records, confidential information, nondisclosure agreement, child history report, health history, social history, educational history, genetic history, termination of parental rights, permanency plan, single source continuum contractor, privacy, redaction

Summary: The Committee on Human Services met with a quorum and first voted out Senate Bill 1589, relating to contract requirements between a single-source continuum contractor and DFPS. The motion to report the bill favorably to the full House with a recommendation that it do pass and be printed prevailed on a 7-0 vote. The committee then heard Senate Bill 500, which would set deadlines for providing foster care adoption records, including health, social, educational, and genetic history reports, to speed adoptions. The bill’s author and witnesses from Addie’s Hope Social Services supported it, saying delays in redacted files can take months, slow permanency for children, and increase costs to the state. Members asked about redactions and sibling/family information, and witnesses explained the bill would mainly speed the preliminary file used to decide whether to proceed with placement. SB 500 was left pending. Members also heard Senate Bill 1266, which would require regular reevaluation of the Medicaid provider support team and add written notice of provider disenrollment at least 30 days in advance. There were no witnesses, no questions, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 1522, concerning continuing care retirement communities, was then laid out and supported by LeadingAge Texas and counsel, who said it updates outdated definitions, clarifies licensing and disclosure rules, and strengthens consumer protections for seniors. It was also left pending. After a brief recess, the committee heard Senate Bill 1137, which would prohibit group home consultants from referring people to unlicensed or unpermitted group homes except in limited circumstances, require disclosure of complaints, and create a Class B misdemeanor for violations. Members discussed whether consultants are regulated and noted concerns about unlicensed referral practices. The bill was left pending, and the committee adjourned after completing its agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• they didn't have to tell the parents. they didn't have to tell the parents.
• the parents. the parents.
• not is not adopted. not is not adopted.
• Parents have amount of money to parents.
• Our parents deserve that. Our that. Our parents deserve that.

Bills: HF751, HF3550, HF3764, HF1490

Keywords: parental notification, school safety, bullying, harassment, violence, prohibited conduct, student discipline, charter school, school district, data practices, student privacy, parent rights, guardian notification, school incident reporting, cyberbullying, restraint, reasonable force, anti-bullying policy, school administration, student conduct

Transcript Highlights:

• I move the two-page Finchem amendment to HB 2908, dated March 12, 2026 at 12:01 p.m., be adopted.
• Okay, members, the question before you is adoption of the amendment.
• , members, House Bill 4042 specifies that for sufficient evidence to justify the termination of a parent-child

Bills: HB2908, HB4042, HCM2001, HCM2002, HCM2005, HCM2006, HCR2047

Keywords: constitutional convention, faithless delegates, state delegates, oath of office, class 2 felony, civil penalties, parent-child relationship, termination of parental rights, child welfare, court procedures, abandonment, neglect, reunification services, felony conviction, Muslim Brotherhood, terrorism, foreign terrorist organization, national security, Islamist extremism, Congress

Summary: The committee approved the March 9, 2026 minutes and then heard House Bill 2908, which would require any approved U.S. constitutional amendment to be ratified by bill and gubernatorial action, create oath and reporting requirements for convention delegates, and impose penalties for “faithless” delegates. The sponsor and supporters argued the bill was a needed safeguard against a runaway Article 5 convention, while opponents said the proposed guardrails would be ineffective and could create a false sense of security. An amendment changing recall to disqualification was adopted, and HB 2908 as amended passed 4-3. The committee then considered HCR 2047, a memorial supporting the use of “Judea and Samaria” instead of “West Bank” in official state communications. Supporters framed it as a matter of historical and biblical accuracy and solidarity with Israel, while opponents argued it injected the legislature into an international conflict and raised First Amendment and civil-rights concerns. The memorial passed 4-3. The committee also passed HCM 2006, urging Congress to reform the Endangered Species Act and Migratory Bird Conservation Act in response to Mexican gray wolf impacts on ranchers, and HB 4042, which clarified the evidence needed to terminate a parent-child relationship by requiring a potential father to both file and serve a paternity action within 30 days. Later, HCM 2005 passed 4-3 after debate over restricting foreign ownership of real property by communist or authoritarian governments. The committee then took up HCM 2001 and HCM 2002, both focused on Muslim organizations: HCM 2001 urged the President and Congress to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization, and HCM 2002 urged a review of CAIR for possible terrorist designation. Witnesses and members opposing both measures argued that state lawmakers lacked authority or evidence for such designations and that the memorials would stigmatize Muslim communities and chill civic participation; supporters described them as appropriate statements of concern. Both memorials passed 4-3, and the committee adjourned after completing its calendar.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill is about the proof of the identity of a child's parents in a suit affecting the parent-child
• Hearing none, the substitute is adopted.
• This bill is about the proof of the identity of a child's parents in a suit affecting the parent-child
• Hearing none, the substitute is adopted.
• Hearing none, the amendment is adopted.

Bills: HB40, HB1916, HB1973, HB2524, HB2530, HB3180, HB3421, HB3783, HB4170, HB4213

Keywords: business court, civil procedure, litigation, jurisdiction, arbitration, divorce, property division, family law, court jurisdiction, marital assets, parent-child relationship, birth certificate, identity proof, Family Code, court process, attorney fees, court costs, legal expenses, dispute resolution, child support

Summary: The committee considered several House bills dealing with family law and civil procedure. House Bill 1916, concerning a court’s jurisdiction in suits to divide property not divided on dissolution of marriage, was reported favorably on a 4-0 vote and recommended for the local and uncontested calendar. House Bill 1973, addressing proof of the identity of a child’s parents in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship, was also adopted with a committee substitute, reported favorably 4-0, and sent to the local and uncontested calendar. House Bill 2524, on recovery of fees, court costs, and expenses in family law proceedings, and House Bill 2530, on special appointments in suits affecting the parent-child relationship, each received favorable 4-0 votes and were likewise recommended for the local and uncontested calendar. The committee then took up House Bill 3180, which was reported favorably 4-0 and recommended for the local and uncontested calendar. The most detailed discussion centered on House Bill 40, relating to updates to business courts. Senator Hughes explained a committee amendment that made conforming changes requested by the Finance Committee and removed language creating two new judgeships, replacing it with a different judge allocation. The amendment was adopted, the amended committee substitute was adopted, and the bill was reported favorably on a 4-0 vote and sent to the local and uncontested calendar. At the end of the meeting, members briefly clarified procedural details about the House Bill 40 amendment and then closed out the agenda. The committee also noted a correction to an earlier reference to Bartleby the Scrivener, and the Chair recessed the Committee on Jurisprudence subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• It relates to proof of the identity of a child's parents in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship
• I don't think parents understand and realize the impact that non-custodial parent support has on a child
• Reunification, parental alienation.
• rights, medical, educational, and parental rights bill, the umbrella of parental rights, SJR 34, it
• rights, medical, educational, and parental rights bill, the umbrella of parental rights, SJR 34, it

Bills: HB40, HB1916, HB1973, HB2524, HB2530, HB3180, HB3421, HB3783, HB4170, HB4213

Keywords: business court, civil procedure, litigation, jurisdiction, arbitration, divorce, property division, family law, court jurisdiction, marital assets, parent-child relationship, birth certificate, identity proof, Family Code, court process, attorney fees, court costs, legal expenses, dispute resolution, child support

Summary: The committee heard several House bills, most of them relating to family law and court procedure, and left each bill pending after testimony. House Bill 1916 would clarify that the court that issued a final divorce decree retains exclusive jurisdiction over later actions involving undivided property. House Bill 1973 would require a certified birth certificate, if reasonably available, to be filed with a SAPCR petition or allow alternative proof of parentage while keeping the information confidential. House Bill 2530 would add qualifications and procedural safeguards for appointing amicus attorneys in SAPCR cases, including notice and hearing requirements, minimum qualifications, conflict rules, and limits on what amicus attorneys may do. House Bill 2524 would make Family Code references to attorney’s fees consistent by using “reasonable and necessary” language. House Bill 3180 would correct a scrivener’s error in the civil discovery rules by changing “settlement” to “statement.” The committee also heard House Bill 4213, which would change the interest rate on overdue child support from the current 6 percent simple interest to a fixed 5 percent and require the Attorney General to report on the impact of the change. Testimony was sharply divided: supporters argued lower interest could improve collections and help low-income obligors catch up, citing research and the size of child-support arrearages; opponents said lowering the rate would reduce incentives to pay and harm custodial parents and children. The Attorney General’s office raised implementation concerns about a House version that would have created a variable rate, while the committee substitute was described as restoring a simple fixed rate. After testimony, the bill was left pending. The committee also discussed House Bill 40, updating business court provisions and supplemental jurisdiction; House Bill 3421, streamlining probate procedures for original wills and copies; and House Bill 417, clarifying venue for lawsuits involving private transfer fees on real property. Each drew limited testimony and was left pending. Finally, House Bill 3783 drew extensive testimony on court-ordered counseling and reunification therapy in family cases. The sponsor and supporters said the bill would protect children and abuse victims from coercive, unregulated reunification practices, while opponents argued it was too broad, could interfere with legitimate therapy and judicial discretion, and might affect military families and other high-conflict cases. The committee heard testimony from judges, therapists, parents, survivors, and advocates, but took no final action and left the bill pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none, the amendment is adopted. We have one green card.
• Hearing none, the amendment is adopted. Okay, we have a white card.
• Hearing none, the amendment is adopted.” “Rep. Eccles? I’m sorry.
• Hearing that amendment is adopted. Rep. Eccles? I'm sorry.
• Foster caregivers, pre-adoptive parents, and relatives providing care have consistently asked for something

Bills: HR267, HCR105, HCR107, HCR110, HCR113, HCR114, SB4, SB52, SB57, SB145, SB152, SB194, SB237, SB333, SB433, SB483, SCR37

Keywords: diabetes, amputation, amputations, diabetic foot ulcer, peripheral artery disease, PAD, wound care, podiatry, vascular disease, endocrinology, limb salvage, health policy, public health, healthcare costs, insurance coverage, Louisiana Department of Health, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, Louisiana Center for Health Innovation, patient education, screening

Transcript Highlights:

• This is what no parent wants.
• Texas classroom teachers, and then item results are to be presented to parents.
• And parents, we did a lot on this, and I want to get your opinion on this.
• We consider these vendor bills that our parents do not want and end up hating.
• Elementary parents meet face-to-face with their teachers to discuss the results.

Bills: HB8

Keywords: HB 8, Texas public school accountability, school accountability, public school transparency, STAAR, state assessments, instructionally supportive assessment program, Student Success Tool, Texas Education Agency, TEA, accountability ratings, A-F ratings, through-year assessment, benchmark testing, norm-referenced assessment, college career military readiness, CCMR, local accountability plan, school district performance, campus turnaround

Transcript Highlights:

• What, as parents, we want is success, right?
• This proposal limits parent and educator input.
• We're talking about students, parents, and educators.
• Additionally, we address parent rights regarding opt-outs.
• Voice, but typically we have just regular parents weigh in, and we haven't heard from a single parent

Bills: HB8

Keywords: HB 8, Texas public school accountability, school accountability, public school transparency, STAAR, state assessments, instructionally supportive assessment program, Student Success Tool, Texas Education Agency, TEA, accountability ratings, A-F ratings, through-year assessment, benchmark testing, norm-referenced assessment, college career military readiness, CCMR, local accountability plan, school district performance, campus turnaround

Transcript Highlights:

• This is what no parent wants.
• No parent wants more testing, and we need to get TEA out of the business of creating these tests.
• We consider these vendor bills that our parents do not want, that our teachers end up hating.
• You're going to do great. parent may, um, look at how a teacher graded assignment.
• Parents are emailed reports.

Bills: HB8

Keywords: HB 8, Texas public school accountability, school accountability, public school transparency, STAAR, state assessments, instructionally supportive assessment program, Student Success Tool, Texas Education Agency, TEA, accountability ratings, A-F ratings, through-year assessment, benchmark testing, norm-referenced assessment, college career military readiness, CCMR, local accountability plan, school district performance, campus turnaround

Summary: The House Committee on Public Education met to hear House Bill 8, which would replace STAAR with a new assessment and accountability system beginning in the 2027-28 school year. The chair described the bill as reducing testing time, limiting benchmark tests, adding beginning-, middle-, and end-of-year assessments, requiring faster score turnaround, involving Texas teachers in test development, and tightening accountability timelines and transparency rules. Members also discussed provisions on A-F ratings, cut scores, CCMR, local accountability plans, and TEA reporting requirements. Committee members and invited witnesses split sharply on the bill’s approach. Supporters, including the chair, TEA Commissioner Mike Morath, and Ed Trust’s Nicholas Munyon Penny, argued the bill would reduce high-stakes pressure, provide quicker and more actionable data, limit over-testing, and better align assessments to Texas standards while preserving criterion-referenced accountability. They said the new system would help teachers and parents intervene sooner and would improve transparency, including parent access to student responses and automatic rescoring in some writing cases. Opponents, including Rep. Hinojosa and student witness Ella Moran, argued the bill still increases testing and replaces one high-stakes test with multiple TEA-created tests. Moran testified that STAAR creates anxiety, disrupts instruction, and does not reflect real learning, while Hinojosa said the House had previously passed a better bill based on a nationally norm-referenced model and criticized the new proposal as a concession to the Senate. Questions also focused on AI scoring of writing, rescoring rates, and whether the bill’s new accountability rules would be reliable and fair. The committee did not take a final vote during the portion provided, but the chair said a vote on HB 8 would be called after public testimony later in the day.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill is about the proof of the identity of a child's parents in a suit affecting the parent-child
• Hearing none, the substitute is adopted.
• Do we need to roll back or do we not adopt it yet?
• We're going to handle it before we adopt it. Okay?
• If not, the committee substitute is adopted.

Bills: HB40, HB40, HB1916, HB1973, HB2524, HB2530, HB3180, HB3421, HB3783, HB4170, HB4213

Keywords: law enforcement, sheriffs, constables, contracts, county authority, business court, civil procedure, litigation, jurisdiction, arbitration, divorce, property division, family law, court jurisdiction, marital assets, parent-child relationship, birth certificate, identity proof, Family Code, court process

Transcript Highlights:

• Proof of the identity of a child's parents in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship.
• Parents' rights are, of course, vitally... ...important, but if a parent abuses the child, the child's
• I am appointed as and have been a guardian advocate, a parent facilitator, a parent coordinator, and
• A process in which one parent deliberately undermines the child's relationship with the other parent
• rights, medical, and parental rights bills, the umbrella of parental rights.

Bills: HB40, HB1916, HB1973, HB2524, HB2530, HB3180, HB3421, HB3783, HB4170, HB4213, HB40

Keywords: business court, civil procedure, litigation, jurisdiction, arbitration, divorce, property division, family law, court jurisdiction, marital assets, parent-child relationship, birth certificate, identity proof, Family Code, court process, attorney fees, court costs, legal expenses, dispute resolution, child support

Transcript Highlights:

• I've watched good parents be removed from their children based on bias or false testimony.
• There are instances where a parent will be entitled to and will collect child support, yet do not have
• I'd like to note that parent-child safety placements were removed from the bill on the Senate floor.
• ' income or a difference in the time shared. between the parents.
• Clouded titles can keep children from fulfilling the wishes of their late parents.

Bills: SB387, SB1335, HB1671, SB1760, SB1839, SB1923, HB1928, HB4942, HB5628, HB5642, HB1980

Keywords: judicial bond, guardianship, probate law, county judge, statutory county court, estates, inheritance, representative duties, court authority, personal representative, retroactive child support, parentage, genetic testing, family code, child's conception, incapacitated persons, court proceedings, guardianship fees, estate management, probate

Bills: SB 128, SB 640, SB 672, SB 904, SB 1141, SB 1263, SB 1525, SB 1528, SB 2041, SB 2306, SB 2308, SB 2357, SB 2446, SB 2695, SB 2857, SB 2891, SB 2583

Keywords: hospital reporting, child abuse, neglect, administrative penalty, medical ethics, child protection, hearing instruments, licensing, continuing education, patient protection, medical evaluations, parent-child relationship, Department of Family and Protective Services, adversary hearing, protected rights, legal custody, prescription drugs, prior authorization, neurodegenerative diseases, health benefits

Bills: SB 128, SB 640, SB 672, SB 904, SB 1141, SB 1263, SB 1525, SB 1528, SB 2041, SB 2306, SB 2308, SB 2357, SB 2446, SB 2695, SB 2857, SB 2891, SB 2583

Keywords: hospital reporting, child abuse, neglect, administrative penalty, medical ethics, child protection, hearing instruments, licensing, continuing education, patient protection, medical evaluations, parent-child relationship, Department of Family and Protective Services, adversary hearing, protected rights, legal custody, prescription drugs, prior authorization, neurodegenerative diseases, health benefits