Bills: HR210, HR142, HCR150, HR132, HCR140, HR133, HCR141, HR182, HCR192, HR96, HCR104, HR57, HCR63, HR56, HCR62, HR39, HCR43, HR48, HCR52, HR119, HCR127, HR111, HCR119, HR88, HCR96, HR120, HCR128, HR117, HCR125, HR51, HCR55, HR54, HCR58, HR149, HCR159, HR64, HCR70, HR42, HCR46, HR84, HCR92, HR92, HCR100, HCR172, HR172, HCR182, HR75, HCR83, HR116, HCR124, HR36, HCR38, HR73, HCR79, HR125, HCR133, HR136, HCR144, HCR60, HCR20, HR32, HCR32, HR115, HCR123, HR108, HCR116, HR7, HCR8, HR47, HCR51, HR178, HCR188, HCR48, HCR49, HR15, HCR13, HR107, HCR115, HR168, HCR178, HR62, HCR68, HR83, HCR91, HR147, HCR155, HR164, HCR174, HR169, HCR179, HR175, HCR185, HR106, HCR114, HR183, HCR193, HR85, HCR93, HR137, HCR145

Keywords: Earl Kawaʻa, Earl Kawaa, H.R. 210, House Resolution, Hawaii Legislature, Hawaiian language, language revitalization, mānaleo, native Hawaiian speaker, Hawaiian culture, cultural preservation, Hoʻoponopono, Kamehameha Schools, Molokaʻi, Oʻahu, community mentorship, traditional practices, āina-based education, kaiapuni, Peace Corps

Bills: HR210, HR142, HCR150, HR132, HCR140, HR133, HCR141, HR182, HCR192, HR96, HCR104, HR57, HCR63, HR56, HCR62, HR39, HCR43, HR48, HCR52, HR119, HCR127, HR111, HCR119, HR88, HCR96, HR120, HCR128, HR117, HCR125, HR51, HCR55, HR54, HCR58, HR149, HCR159, HR64, HCR70, HR42, HCR46, HR84, HCR92, HR92, HCR100, HCR172, HR172, HCR182, HR75, HCR83, HR116, HCR124, HR36, HCR38, HR73, HCR79, HR125, HCR133, HR136, HCR144, HCR60, HCR20, HR32, HCR32, HR115, HCR123, HR108, HCR116, HR7, HCR8, HR47, HCR51, HR178, HCR188, HCR48, HCR49, HR15, HCR13, HR107, HCR115, HR168, HCR178, HR62, HCR68, HR83, HCR91, HR147, HCR155, HR164, HCR174, HR169, HCR179, HR175, HCR185, HR106, HCR114, HR183, HCR193, HR85, HCR93, HR137, HCR145

Keywords: Earl Kawaʻa, Earl Kawaa, H.R. 210, House Resolution, Hawaii Legislature, Hawaiian language, language revitalization, mānaleo, native Hawaiian speaker, Hawaiian culture, cultural preservation, Hoʻoponopono, Kamehameha Schools, Molokaʻi, Oʻahu, community mentorship, traditional practices, āina-based education, kaiapuni, Peace Corps

Transcript Highlights:

• People that were just disrupting the legislative process while raising funds.
• If you're disrupting the legislative process, you can't raise money.
• If they don't disrupt the legislative process, they can raise money.
• Are they disrupting the legislative process, or are they? Well, I'm just asking generically.
• Disrupting the legislative process in the state of Texas.

Bills: HB18

Keywords: HB 18, Texas Legislature, quorum break, quorum-busting, legislative walkout, absent legislators, political contributions, campaign finance, political expenditures, legislative caucus, specific-purpose committee, Texas Ethics Commission, civil penalty, show cause order, district court, Fifteenth Court of Appeals, session fundraising, travel lodging food expenses, legislative session, compelled attendance

Summary: The meeting of the committee focused on the discussions surrounding HB18, which aims to prevent legislators from financially benefiting when they break quorum. Chairman Shaheen emphasized that this bill addresses the integrity of the Texas legislature and responds to constituent concerns about lawmakers being absent and raising funds simultaneously. Throughout the meeting, members discussed the implications of enforcing penalties for breaking quorum and the balance between legislative strategy and financial transparency. Various representatives expressed their views, with some supporting the bill for enhancing accountability, while others argued that it imposes unfair restrictions on a constitutional tactic historically used by minority factions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fundraising in general I'm trying to upset about was people that were just disrupting the legislative
• If you're disrupting the legislative process, you can't raise money. If you're breaking quorum.
• Benefiting from their position and actions that they're taking, disrupting the legislative process.
• If they, if they don't, uh, disrupt the legislative process, they can raise money.
• Uh, with is the financial gain that members are receiving for disrupting the legislative process.

Bills: HB18

Keywords: HB 18, Texas Legislature, quorum break, quorum-busting, legislative walkout, absent legislators, political contributions, campaign finance, political expenditures, legislative caucus, specific-purpose committee, Texas Ethics Commission, civil penalty, show cause order, district court, Fifteenth Court of Appeals, session fundraising, travel lodging food expenses, legislative session, compelled attendance

Transcript Highlights:

• Freedom of speech is not the freedom to threaten, harass, or disrupt.
• So we would move on that not on disruption, but on defamation.
• Disruption. You talked about the party putting on the event.
• Des Moines, is it considered disruptive?
• What disrupted on those two days? A peaceful protest. What disrupted on those two days?

Summary: The joint Senate and House Select Committee on Civil Discourse and Freedom of Speech in Higher Education convened for its first public hearing, adopted its proposed rules without objection, and framed the hearing as an organizational, invited-testimony-only session. Members repeatedly condemned political violence and the assassination of Charlie Kirk, saying the committee was created in response to concerns about civil discourse, intimidation, and hostility on college campuses. Several members emphasized that the goal was not to suppress speech but to protect open expression while maintaining order, due process, and institutional accountability. The first witness, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Commissioner Wyn Rosser, outlined implementation of Senate Bill 37. He described the General Education Advisory Committee, which is reviewing broad core-curriculum knowledge and skills and may recommend reducing the current 42-hour core, while leaving review of specific courses to individual institutions. He also explained the new Office of the Ombudsman, the board’s role in supporting it, and existing training and certification requirements for governing board members. Members asked about enforcement tools, transparency, and whether the ombudsman would investigate complaints involving censorship, retaliation, or political bias; Rosser said some enforcement exists in certain laws, but he deferred on the exact scope of the ombudsman’s investigatory authority and on issues outside the agency’s role. University of Texas at Austin President Jim Davis testified that UT Austin supports free speech, academic freedom, and civil discourse, and he described three areas of focus: speech on campus grounds, classroom discourse, and how people treat one another. He said the university enforces time, place, and manner rules, expects professors to present alternative views on controversial topics, and has created internal reporting and appeal processes for students and faculty. Members questioned him about heckler’s veto incidents, protests, off-campus participants, complaints about professors, hate speech, and whether the university would protect speakers and students from disruption or unfair targeting. Davis said the university would not tolerate disruptions, would use due process and factual review, and is working to align campus practices with the new law and regents’ expectations. Ricky Adam Jr. of Turning Point USA’s Club America described the group’s campus and high-school organizing, praised Charlie Kirk’s approach to open debate, and said the organization is expanding in Texas. He raised concerns about school administrators and a counselor at an Early College High School in Killeen allegedly interfering with a student club and withholding footage, and committee members said they would seek information and, if necessary, use legislative process to investigate. Members from both chambers reiterated support for free speech, criticized political violence and campus suppression of viewpoints, and stressed that future hearings would continue examining implementation and enforcement issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, the specific concern that I heard was people disrupting the legislative process, breaking quorum
• They can't raise money when they've left the state and they're disrupting the legislative process.
• They're taking, disrupting the legislative process of the Texas legislature.
• If they follow, if they don't disrupt the legislative process, they can raise money.
• Are they disrupting the legislative process, or are they... Well, I'm just asking, generically.

Bills: HB18

Keywords: HB 18, Texas Legislature, quorum break, quorum-busting, legislative walkout, absent legislators, political contributions, campaign finance, political expenditures, legislative caucus, specific-purpose committee, Texas Ethics Commission, civil penalty, show cause order, district court, Fifteenth Court of Appeals, session fundraising, travel lodging food expenses, legislative session, compelled attendance

Transcript Highlights:

• You have to intentionally do it and intend to disrupt the service.
• It says you have to intend to disrupt the religious...
• It says you have to intend to disrupt the religious...
• Madam Chair, and are you allowed to disrupt?
• They're not guilty under this section because their intent is not to disrupt. Conduct.

Bills: HB2244, HB2364, HB2573, HB2749, HB2862, HB2870, HB4117, HCR2004

Keywords: evictions, judgment satisfaction, tenant rights, landlord obligations, court procedures, abortion-inducing drugs, medical abortion, pharmaceutical regulation, felonies, state law, DUI, ignition interlock, substance abuse treatment, driving privileges, alcohol education, felony conviction, misdemeanor designation, court judgment, criminal justice reform, rehabilitation

Summary: The committee heard and acted on several bills. HB 2749, as amended, would allow certain nonviolent class 4, 5, or 6 felonies to be redesignated as class 1 misdemeanors after five years and after completion of sentence terms, with exclusions for crimes such as cruelty to animals, weapons misconduct, and failure to register as a sex offender. Supporters framed it as a redemption and reintegration measure, and the committee adopted the amendment and gave the bill a due pass recommendation on a 6-0 vote with one not voting. HB 2870 would prohibit certain level 2 and level 3 sex offenders from living together in the same single-family dwelling, with exceptions for relatives, community reentry centers, and certain existing supervised facilities. The sponsor and neighborhood residents described a real-life situation in Chandler involving multiple offenders in one house and argued the bill would protect families; opponents warned it could push people into homelessness and undermine supervision. After testimony from residents, housing operators, and a structured-housing provider, the committee approved the bill 3-2 with two not voting. HB 2862, which increases penalties for offenses committed while wearing a mask to conceal identity, drew support from the City of Scottsdale and opposition from the ACLU over First Amendment concerns; it passed 3-2 with two not voting. HB 2364 would create criminal penalties for mailing or delivering abortion-inducing drugs, including felony penalties for providers and a misdemeanor for ordering such drugs by mail. Supporters said it would enforce existing law and protect women; opponents argued it conflicts with Proposition 139 and constitutional protections for abortion access. The committee gave it a 4-3 due pass recommendation. HB 2244, supported by Phoenix Vice Mayor Keisha Hodge Washington, would streamline satisfaction of eviction judgments when tenants have paid and allow sealing of eviction records in some cases; it passed unanimously 7-0. HB 2573, which removes the 45-day waiting period before some repeat DUI offenders can apply for an ignition interlock restricted license, also passed unanimously 7-0. The committee also considered HB 4117, a strike-everything amendment creating a new offense for interfering with a religious service or worship by obstructing access or engaging in disorderly conduct intended to disrupt the service. Supporters, including ADL and Jewish community representatives, said it would protect worshippers from obstruction and intimidation; opponents argued it was vague, unnecessary, and could chill protest speech. After extensive debate, the committee adopted the strike-everything amendment and gave the bill a due pass recommendation. Finally, HCR 2004, a mirror resolution to SCR 1004, would require voter approval for local photo enforcement systems and periodic reauthorization; it was discussed with support from city and league representatives, but the transcript ends before a final vote on that measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so that's really disruptive or represents a significant disruption. to the classroom and whether
• Disruption in the classroom in this amount of clears.
• Often disrupting our neighboring classrooms as well and if going to the library disrupting those classrooms
• And instruction for many students was disrupted.
• Repeated or significant disruption.

Bills: HB6, HB27, HB 123, HB210, HB213, HB222, HB610, HB 1085, HB1481, HB6, HB27, HB123, HB210, HB213, HB222

Keywords: mental health, telehealth, public schools, discipline management, behavioral interventions, financial literacy, high school education, curriculum requirements, economics, personal finance, HB 123, kindergarten readiness, early literacy, early numeracy, reading screening, math screening, foundational literacy, foundational numeracy, dyslexia screening, reading intervention

Transcript Highlights:

• The university does not see that as disruptive.
• A lot of questions for you today and on the issue of disruption.
• a separate party being the source of the disruption.
• We just think it's going to be too disruptive.
• What disrupted on those two days?

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Lastly, I'd like to address disruptions during the hearing.
• Conduct that disrupts or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of this hearing is prohibited.
• We talk about placement disruption, and that sounds like, oh, that's annoying.
• We didn’t have any placements disrupted.
• We didn't have any placements disrupted.

Summary: The hearing covered several child welfare, human services, tribal housing, child care, and long-term care bills. SB 1099 would clarify local governments’ authority to provide state or local public benefits to all residents under PRWORA; SB 1190 would regulate private youth transport services by requiring permits, background checks, training, and bans on blindfolds, hoods, restraints, and overnight pickups; SB 1322 would streamline tribal access to Community Care Expansion housing grants and better align the process with tribal sovereignty; SB 1109 would require an annual license renewal review for STRTPs with five or more Type A citations in a year; SB 1234 would require fentanyl testing in juvenile dependency cases when a court finds a risk of fentanyl use; SB 991 would require DSS to identify the specific type of abuse on its public licensing database; SB 1200 would redefine “infant” for family child care ratio purposes as under 18 months; and SB 1345 would strengthen foster youth rights regarding access to and dignified transport of personal belongings. The committee also approved a consent calendar including SB 534, SB 1410, and SB 1421. Testimony was largely in support of the measures, often from authors, advocates, county officials, and people with lived experience. Supporters of SB 1190 described traumatic youth transport practices and argued for basic safety standards. SB 1322 supporters said tribal grantees face unnecessary delays and collateral demands that conflict with sovereignty. SB 1109 drew support from county probation officers who cited repeated serious violations and public safety concerns at STRTPs, while the chair ultimately opposed the bill as duplicative of existing CDSS authority. SB 1234 drew emotional support from a grandparent who lost a child to fentanyl, but also opposition from the Drug Policy Alliance and a dependency attorney, who argued the bill was redundant, vague, and could create biased or unnecessary testing; amendments were accepted to narrow the standard. SB 991 supporters said the public needs more specific information about abuse findings, SB 1200 supporters said the change would expand infant care capacity and help working families, and SB 1345 supporters said foster youth deserve dignity rather than having belongings packed in trash bags. Votes were taken after quorum was established. SB 991, SB 1200, SB 1345, SB 1190, SB 1234, SB 1322, and SB 1099 were all reported out of committee, most on unanimous or near-unanimous votes; SB 1234 passed 6-0 as amended to Appropriations, and SB 1099 later had a vote change recorded, ending 5-1. SB 1109 did not advance after the motion failed for lack of a second, and it was held in committee. The committee then adjourned and transitioned into an oversight hearing reviewing the outcomes of AB 2247 (placement stability and notice protections for foster youth) and AB 2496, with presenters discussing how the earlier foster youth placement law has changed practice and the importance of dignity, notice, and youth voice in placement decisions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yes, Senate Bill 182 relating to service disruptions.
• Again, still on Senate Bill 182, relating to service disruptions.
• Again, still on Senate Bill 182, relating to service disruptions.
• Again, still on Senate Bill 182, relating to service disruptions.
• Bill 182 relating to service disruptions Bill 182 relating to service disruptions members<01:06:

Keywords: 912, senate, all

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.

Transcript Highlights:

• He wasn't disruptive.
• He wasn't disruptive.
• He wasn't disruptive.
• He wasn't disruptive.
• disrupted? disrupted?

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• with agencies to monitor any disruptions with agencies to monitor any disruptions to<00:37:50.720
• When we hear about a disrupted.
• We've had dozens of state awards disrupted. And when I say disrupted, that means a lot of things.
• <00:59:27.680> uh on page 11 regarding the disruptions uh on page 11 regarding the disruptions
• any current disruptions from the US any current disruptions from the US Department<01:03:04.240> of

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Lastly, I'd like to address disruptions during the hearing.
• Conduct that disrupts or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of this hearing is prohibited.
• After experiencing additional placement disruptions and homelessness, she eventually aged out.
• We talk about placement disruption, and that sounds like, oh, that's annoying.
• We didn't have any placements disrupted.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:15:13.920> not distri distribute disturb disrupting not distri distribute disturb disrupting
• > have<00:15:49.199> long-term disruption is sure to have long-term disruption is sure
• > Educationally, these disruptions create Educationally, these disruptions create measurable<00:46:37.440
• The disruption to her family, the disruption to her school community, the fear, the deprivation, the
• to her family, the the disruption to her family, the disruption<01:17:00.719> to<01:17:00.880

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• On the one that they engage in disorderly or disruptive conduct inside the legislative building, and
• On the one that they engage in disorderly or disruptive conduct inside the legislative building, and
• So I think members would be more tolerant of these disruptions than anyone coming in and making a decision
• So I think members would be more tolerant of these disruptions than anyone coming in and making a decision
• Disruption.

Keywords: This meeting will take place upon adjournment of the Senate Chambers. There is not an exact time for this meeting therefore a placeholder time for the live stream has been set for 4:00PM est. Meeting Start: 00:00:00 Roll Call: 00:00:20 HB 10: 00:00:47 HB 399: 00:03:40, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and took up two House bills. House Bill 10, relating to the rights of real property owners, was presented as a response to squatting. The sponsors said it would create a streamlined process to remove unauthorized occupants from real property, define “squatter” in statute, and keep existing criminal mischief penalties aligned for damage to property. After a motion and second, the bill was approved and reported favorably with the expression that it should pass. The committee then heard House Bill 399, relating to interference with legislative proceedings. The sponsor and the Senate Sergeant at Arms said the bill is intended to protect the General Assembly’s ability to conduct business by penalizing obstructing or impeding legislators or legislative employees and disruptive conduct in legislative spaces, while still allowing protest. They emphasized that the measure would give the legislative branch protections similar to those already available to the executive and judicial branches, and that arrests would be made only at the call of leadership or a committee chair. Members voted to advance House Bill 399 after discussion. One senator explained that while he supported moving the bill forward, he was concerned the language could be broad enough to cover peaceful demonstrations, such as teachers rallying at the Capitol, and said he would need more time before deciding how to vote on the floor. The committee ultimately reported the bill favorably with the expression that it should pass, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• One kid can disrupt a class.
• One kid can disrupt a class.
• One kid can disrupt a class.
• One kid can disrupt a class.
• One kid can disrupt a class.

Bills: HB2117, HB2155, HB1832, HB1601, HB2297, HB2397, HB1893, HB2533, HB1890, HB2004, HB1810, HB2323, HB1691, HB1671, HB2619, HB1481, HB2314, HB2319, HB2214, HB2488, HB2009, HB2007, HB1964, HB2218, HB1535, HB1977, HB2054, HB2046, HB146, HB2094, HB2181, HB2515, HB2444, HB2385, HB1724, HB1733, HB2416, HB2001, HB1603, HB1753, HB2140, HB1962, HB1963, HB2096, HB1959, HB1960, HB2293, HB2288, HB1752, HB1573, HB469, HB2091, HB1851, HB1688, HB1696, HB2417, HB2375, HB2333, HB2152, HB1881, HB2395, HB1721, HB1921, HB1730, HB1697, HB1824, HB2282, HB2078, HB2321, HB2279, HB1522, HB2097, HB2433, HB2106, HB2274, HB2452, HB1764, HB2438, HB1860, HB2604, HB2118, HB2017, HB2216, HB1934, HB2454, HB2427, HB2207, HB1840, HB1644, HB1645, HB1946, HB1648, HB2324, HB1509, HB1514, HB1515, HB2164, HB2165, HB2283, HB2386

Keywords: arts education, data mapping, task force, creative economy, cultural preservation, workforce development, geographic information systems, agriculture, data collection, statistical program, sustainable practices, Hawaii, aquaculture, biosecurity, food security, sustainable seafood, regulatory framework, interagency coordination, environmental stewardship, invasive species

Transcript Highlights:

• The Assembly has experienced a number of disruptions to committee and floor proceedings in the last few
• We will not accept disruptive behavior or behavior that incites or thwarts.
• The Assembly has experienced a number of disruptions to committee and floor proceedings in the last few
• We will not accept disruptive behavior or behavior that incites or threatens violence.
• No engaging in conduct that disrupts, disturbs, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct of this hearing

Summary: The Assembly Communications and Conveyance Committee met with Chair Tasha Berner presiding and reviewed one item, AB 2790, a committee bill concerning the California Teleconnect Fund. The chair opened with extensive ground rules on orderly conduct and public comment, then the committee secretary called the roll and established a quorum. The bill was described as updating eligibility and administrative procedures for the CTF, clarifying treatment of non-instructional facilities, and revising how applicants coordinate CTF applications with the federal E-Rate program. Supporters said the measure responds to concerns raised in a prior oversight hearing about CPUC rulemaking that could make the program harder for schools and other eligible entities to use. Kim Lewis of CENIC said the bill would preserve continuity, stability, and fairness for broadband support to educational and research institutions, while Christina DeCaro of the California Library Association and Kimberly Rosenberger on behalf of Superintendent Tony Thurmond also voiced support. No opposition testimony was presented. The committee then voted to pass AB 2790 and refer it to the Assembly Committee on Appropriations. The roll was left open briefly for additional votes, and the bill ultimately passed 9-0 before the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Not blocking traffic, not disrupting anything.
• This is very much about coercive, disruptive activity of the type that you know when you see.
• <00:14:58.800> activity disruptive activity disruptive activity of<00:15:01.160> the<00
• to somebody else's disruptive whims. to somebody else's disruptive whims.
• It manifested an intentionally<00:31:28.560> disruptive intentionally disruptive intentionally

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House File 2809 was taken up, and Representative Hudson moved the bill with a recommendation to the General Register. The committee adopted the author’s amendment A1, which changed the effective date from 2025 to 2026. Hudson described the bill as a narrow prohibition on protests at or around a person’s dwelling, arguing that homes deserve special protection from coercive or intimidating conduct and citing Supreme Court precedent on focused residential picketing. He said the bill would not apply to residences that also function as businesses or public meeting places and emphasized that it would apply equally to private citizens and public officials. Several members raised constitutional and drafting concerns. Representative Curran said the bill appeared too broad and could sweep in lawful expressive activity, including people standing on their own property with signs, and questioned whether it would survive constitutional scrutiny. Representative Pinto argued the bill either duplicates existing criminal laws or goes beyond the conduct Hudson described, stressing that the law should focus on conduct rather than the label of protest. Representative Bentele and Representative Hollins asked for clearer definitions of “protest,” “residence,” and whether the bill would reach sidewalks, streets, Airbnbs, and other public or mixed-use spaces. Representative Watson noted existing laws on targeted residential picketing, harassment, and stalking and asked what gap the bill was meant to fill. Hudson responded that the bill was intended to address coercive, disruptive activity and said he was open to amendments to clarify that constitutionally protected activity in places where a person has a right to be would not be affected. He argued that current laws are not always enforced consistently and that the bill would clarify legislative intent for law enforcement and prosecutors. The discussion ended without a final vote on the bill itself, after members and the author indicated a willingness to continue working on the language.

Transcript Highlights:

• If a kid is acting up, if a kid is causing a disruption, if a kid is causing a disruption, if... ...learning
• They know what a significant disruption is.
• They know what a significant disruption is.
• That is a significant disruption, and a repeated significant disruption is something that happens again
• , but the teacher causes the situation to become disruptive.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, pledges, and several ceremonial recognitions, including Wilson County Day, San Antonio Mission Indian Descendants Day, and Blue Ribbon Lobby Day, along with acknowledgments of visiting groups and a birthday greeting. The chamber also announced committee meetings and then moved into floor business, including conference committee action on Senate Bill 1, the state budget. A series of motions to instruct House conferees on SB 1 were debated and voted on. One motion sought to restore salary for Attorney General Ken Paxton after his impeachment-related suspension; it passed 88-56. Another, from Rep. Olcott, directed conferees to support amendments requiring data collection on the costs of undocumented immigrants in hospitals and prisons; after extended debate and a failed amendment from Rep. Martinez Fischer to also study immigrants’ economic contributions, the motion passed 86-61. The House also adopted instructions to eliminate Texas Lottery Commission funding, to support amendments restricting public education institutions from affirming gender identities inconsistent with biological sex, and to seek an additional $4 billion in property tax relief, with each motion passing on recorded votes. The House then took up a supplemental calendar and passed several bills, including HB 39 on veteran death data, HB 102 on priority registration for certain students entering military service, HB 126 on student-athlete compensation and representation, HB 290 on tuition and fee assistance for members of the Texas military forces, HB 300 on Texas Armed Services Scholarship Program updates, and HB 2143 naming a highway in honor of Army Specialist Joey Lins. The chamber also postponed consideration of HJR 2 and HJR 6. Later, the House considered HB 120 on career and technology education pathways and HB 20 on applied science pathway programs for high school students. HB 120 received a perfecting amendment and was advanced after discussion about workforce preparation. HB 20 prompted extensive questioning about transportation, costs, and how students would access partner campuses such as community colleges and TSTC sites; debate continued as the transcript ended, with members examining how the program would operate and whether approval authority would rest with TEA.