Transcript Highlights:

• stakeholders about a much smaller group stakeholders about a much smaller group of<00:43:09.360>
• So this framework a judicial group.
• <02:08:54.800> So minor children in this regard. So minor children in this regard.
• Representative Perez asked, "Will there be a minority report?"
• And will there be a minority report on this? All right.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• child, sometimes it says a parents minor child, sometimes it says a parents minor child,<00:16:08.320
• They do have a group of kids that they can relate to.
• They do have a group of kids that they can discuss some of their issues with.
• They do have a group of kids together.
• Actually, can I just have the form for the minority report for the prior bill, please?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee met in executive session on Senate Bill 72, a parental rights in education measure, and considered an amendment offered by Representative Raymond. Raymond explained that his changes were intended to narrow the bill so it would not force schools to act as “surveillance operatives” for parents, especially regarding older students, and to avoid requiring teachers to disclose private family matters such as a student’s sexual orientation or pronouns. He also struck the bill’s “clear and convincing” standard and replaced it with a lower “evidence” standard, arguing teachers should have some basis for concern but not a burden equivalent to terminating parental rights. He said the amendment was meant to preserve due process, avoid weaponizing the bill in civil disputes, and reduce the risk of lawsuits. Members then debated the scope of the bill and amendment. Supporters said schools should not withhold information about a child’s health, school environment, behavior, bullying, self-harm, or criminal conduct, and argued that parents have a right to know about serious issues such as mental health concerns, sexual assault, drug use, or other misconduct. Several members emphasized that teachers do not diagnose mental illness, but should report observable concerns and involve school administrators or counselors when necessary. Opponents argued the bill would chill communication between students and trusted adults at school, especially for children from dysfunctional or unsafe homes, and said it could force outing of gay or trans students and increase the risk of harm or self-harm. One member cited the Department of Education’s trusted-adult approach and said teachers are not covered by formal confidentiality rules in the same way as lawyers or doctors. The discussion included examples and hypotheticals about bullying, sexual assault, drug use, self-harm, gender dysphoria, and whether a teacher would have to tell parents if a student used different pronouns or a nickname. Raymond and supporters said the bill would require disclosure of serious safety concerns but not compel teachers to diagnose or pry into private matters. Opponents argued the bill’s language still sweeps too broadly and could force disclosure in situations where a student fears abuse or being kicked out at home. The transcript does not show a final vote on the amendment or bill in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Choice programs in Florida significantly represent minority families.
• And you have many pastors that reflect their congregations in your group.
• And the facts are that the public school system is majority-minority.
• It’s like we’re getting to groups that we’re able to stay. Sir, what is your name?
• They want them to have play groups with their neighbors.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Education K-16 convened with a quorum, adopted its committee rules, and heard opening remarks from members introducing staff and outlining priorities for the session. Several senators emphasized support for public education, teacher pay and safety, parental choice, and the combined K-16 jurisdiction of the committee. The chair also reviewed hearing procedures, including public testimony registration and time limits. The main item was Senate Bill 2, the Texas Education Freedom Act, laid out by Chairman Creighton. He described the bill as an education savings account program intended to expand school choice, with a $200 million universal eligibility pool and an additional $800 million targeted to students with disabilities and lower-income families. He said the bill includes anti-fraud safeguards, criminal background checks for vendors, reporting requirements, data protections, and annual testing for participating students, while not imposing STAAR on private schools or homeschoolers. He also said the bill removes a prior hold-harmless provision for public schools and is separate from public school funding and teacher pay legislation. Members questioned the bill’s income threshold, lottery and priority structure, treatment of homeschoolers, microschools, charter schools, religious freedom protections, citizenship/lawful presence language, cybersecurity, open records, and disability-related issues, including whether 504 students and foster children should be included. Creighton said the bill is designed to prioritize former public school students with disabilities or lower incomes, while also allowing universal eligibility within the program’s first funding tier, and that the Comptroller would oversee vendor screening and cybersecurity rules. He said the bill does not direct curriculum or interfere with religious beliefs and that amendments may be offered later on citizenship and other issues. After member questions, the committee began invited testimony, starting with EdChoice representative Robert Inlow, who testified in support of SB 2 and cited national growth in school choice programs and studies he said show positive effects for students and public schools.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've got a great group of people for Bartlesville.
• They are still a minor. They are still a minor who is now pregnant.
• And then they're a minor in another state.
• Minors can be pressured into marriage. That's what we heard.
• Pregnancy can pressure minors into marriage.

Bills: SB1687, HB1687, HB4431, HB2894, HB2979, HB3262, HB3298, HB3369, HB3431, HB3462, SB1226, SB1876, SB1916, SB1920, HB3467, HB3498, HB3500, HB3521, HB3581, HB3650, HB3673, HB3764, HB3767, HB3781, HB3800, HB3831, HB3834, HB3941, HB2749, HB3970, HB3972, HB3979, HB3980, HB3981, HB3996, HB4095, HB4104, HB4191, HB4248, HB4298, HB4338, HB4427, HB4428, HJR1023, HB3660, HB3718, HB4326, HB3443, HB3880, HB3649, HB3000, SB1651, SB504, SB372, SB1326, SB1633, SB248, SB1242, SB1238, SB423, SB1989, SB1286, SB904, SB1213, SB1216, SB1827, SB65, SB1390, SB259, SB1944, SB540, SB2139, SB346, SB1595, SB1400, SB1555, SB1209, SB2110, SB1670, SB1061, SB2104, HR1057, SB1946, SB1734, SB1316, SB1360, SB1557, SB1684, SB2049, SB1410, SB2011, SB1437, SB1204, SB1732, SB1775, SB2084, SB1380, SB1572, SB1772, SB1224, SB710, SB1338, SB1266, SB1303, SB1307, SB1562, SB1794, SB1191, SB1983, SB1832, SB1448, SB1534, SB1593, SB1597, SB1630, SB1489, SB1726, SB1796, SB1806, SB1877, SB1451, SB1553, SB1632, SB1423, SB1425, SB1502, SB2180, SB1725, SB2182, HB3003, HB3004, HB4434, HB4324, HB4342, HB2137, HB4432, SJR50, SJR52, SJR53

Keywords: driver licenses, exam proctor, Service Oklahoma, commercial training, background checks, advance directive, advance health care directive, health care proxy, medical power of attorney, durable power of attorney for health care, living will, surrogate decision-maker, default surrogate, health care agent, capacity determination, supported decision making, mental health directive, psychiatric advance directive, end-of-life care, life-sustaining treatment

Summary: The House recognized several visitors and groups during the day, including the Norman North High School Cheer and Stunt Team, a student page, Bartlesville Day at the Capitol, and Leadership Elk City. The chamber then took up a long series of Senate amendments and final passage votes on a wide range of measures, with most amendments adopted without objection and many bills passing by wide margins. Topics included advanced health care directives, the Oklahoma Rural Jobs Act, motor vehicle and insurance changes, food truck fire suppression, foreign adversary land ownership restrictions, plumbing licensing reform, probate procedure, financial institutions, riots, Medicaid, court reporters, public finance, district attorney recruitment incentives, child care, the Oklahoma Brine Development Act, adjunct teachers, workers’ compensation, and other technical or policy updates. Several bills drew substantive debate. The Oklahoma Rural Jobs Act prompted questions about the additional $15 million funding tranche, return on investment, and the use of out-of-state fund managers; supporters said the program had created thousands of jobs and generated strong tax revenue, while opponents criticized the lack of independent ROI data and transparency. House Bill 3500 on probate procedure also drew questions about a nine-month deadline for successor affidavits, with the author saying the change would prevent a “gotcha” that could defeat a decedent’s wishes. House Bill 3660 on natural organic reduction was the subject of extended debate, with supporters arguing for personal freedom and rejecting claims about misuse of the resulting material, while opponents raised concerns about the practice and its regulation. The House passed most measures by comfortable margins, including bills on advanced health care directives, professions and occupations, motor vehicles, Medicaid, insurance, child care, court reporters, public finance, and criminal law. A few measures failed or were reconsidered: Senate Bill 1916 initially failed on a 46-39 vote, but the House later voted to reconsider and then passed it on reconsideration. Several bills also carried emergency clauses, which were adopted where required by two-thirds votes. The session ended with the House still considering debate on House Bill 3660 after the chamber had recessed and returned to order.

Transcript Highlights:

• On the measures before us, all minority members vote aye, with the exception of the following.
• <01:25:56.480> of introduced on behalf of a group of introduced on behalf of a group of advocates
• <01:31:48.719> to group to group to address<01:31:51.679> the address the address the concerns
• Lee votes no. measures before us, all minority members measures before us, all minority members vote<
• <01:55:10.320> members measures before us, all minority members measures before us, all minority

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• These bills have increased visibility into outside spending groups and have led to a more transparent
• For decades, Section 2 of the Federal Voting Rights Act recognized that minority voters can be denied
• Sarah Brennan with the Whiteman Group on behalf of NextGen California and PANA in support.
• At the time, existing state law was clear that after... ...conspiracy groups.
• The group of legal and voters of California in very strong support. Thank you.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll be working specifically with these individual institutions in collaboration as a group of presidents
• Coverage of important news events that were going on, and so they've formed a group of stations in this
• This is not a minor item to simply be dealt with later. It's a heart of the matter issue.
• or what about that group?
• One of the other people indicated concern about which groups might get left out, and when there's not

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh and just being committed by minors.
• And so from my perspective, if you're a minor or an adult, but either way if we're talking about minors
• And so from my perspective, if you're a minor or an adult, but either way if we're talking about minors
• And so from my perspective, if you're a minor or an adult, but either way if we're talking about minors
• together<01:02:34.600> to Get that group worked together to Get that group worked together

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, um if work group at the same time.
• that this work group is focused on?
• <00:58:52.160> step step backwards at all in the minor step step backwards at all in the minor
• > clarifying<01:44:59.679> technical a few minor changes clarifying technical a few minor
• um in the work group. um in the work group.

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The Seclusion Working Group approved the prior meeting minutes and then spent most of the meeting discussing draft recommendations and a Senate amendment, 007-7, related to seclusion in schools. The chair explained the history of the issue, including Minnesota’s 2023 ban on seclusion from birth through grade 3, and described 007-7 as a compromise developed with stakeholders that would extend the ban through grade 6 unless strict conditions are met. Those conditions include explicit written informed consent from all parents or guardians in their primary language, oral translation of safeguards, showing the seclusion room before consent, mandatory follow-up IEP meetings after repeated use, outreach and education for families, and data reporting on use of seclusion. The chair also said the amendment would prevent judges or other officials from ordering seclusion over a parent’s objection. Members then reviewed the draft recommendations line by line. They agreed to revise language to add “and fund” after “mandate” in the first section, and discussed changing references from “level three and level four” to “level three and higher,” though several members ultimately preferred keeping the focus on school settings and not expanding into medical or correctional settings. They also discussed replacing the word “subjected” with more neutral language such as “experience” or “whose IEP includes seclusion.” Another issue was whether the recommendations should distinguish between students whose IEP already includes seclusion and students who experience seclusion in an emergency but do not have it in their IEP; members suggested splitting that into separate recommendations and possibly adding a new item for the latter situation. A final discussion focused on whether the working group should recommend a mandated alternative-to-seclusion program and whether such a mandate should be tied to funding. School district representatives said many districts already use programs such as CPI, but others, especially outstate districts, charter schools, hospitals, and residential settings, may face significant costs if required to adopt new programs like Ukeru. Members generally agreed that if the legislature is asked to require implementation of new alternatives, funding should accompany the mandate. The chair also noted that existing law already requires an IEP team meeting after restrictive procedures are used twice in 30 days, and encouraged members to compare that with the 007-7 language before finalizing recommendations.

Bills: SB2, SB3, SB4, SB5, SB6, SB7, SB8, SB9, SB10, SB11, SB12, SB13, SB14, SB15, SB16, SB18, SB34, SB2, SB3, SB4, SB5, SB6, SB7, SB8, SB9, SB10, SB11, SB12, SB13, SB14, SB15, SB16, SB18, SB34, SB 2, SB 3, SB 4, SB 5, SB 6, SB 7, SB 8, SB 9, SB 10, SB 11, SB 12, SB 13, SB 14, SB 15, SB 16, SB 17, SB 18, SB 34, SB2, SB3, SB4, SB5, SB6, SB7, SB8, SB9, SB10, SB11, SB12, SB13, SB14, SB15, SB16, SB17, SB18, SB34

Keywords: flooding, public safety, outdoor warning sirens, disaster preparedness, emergency response, flood warning, outdoor sirens, local government, safety measures, flood management, emergency preparedness, municipal safety, disaster response, disaster relief, emergency funding, Meteorological forecasting, local government assistance, training facilities, Texas congressional redistricting, U.S. House districts

Bills: SB2, SB3, SB4, SB5, SB6, SB7, SB8, SB9, SB10, SB11, SB12, SB13, SB14, SB15, SB16, SB18, SB34, SB2, SB3, SB4, SB5, SB6, SB7, SB8, SB9, SB10, SB11, SB12, SB13, SB14, SB15, SB16, SB18, SB34, SB 2, SB 3, SB 4, SB 5, SB 6, SB 7, SB 8, SB 9, SB 10, SB 11, SB 12, SB 13, SB 14, SB 15, SB 16, SB 17, SB 18, SB 34, SB2, SB3, SB4, SB5, SB6, SB7, SB8, SB9, SB10, SB11, SB12, SB13, SB14, SB15, SB16, SB17, SB18, SB34

Keywords: flooding, public safety, outdoor warning sirens, disaster preparedness, emergency response, flood warning, outdoor sirens, local government, safety measures, flood management, emergency preparedness, municipal safety, disaster response, disaster relief, emergency funding, Meteorological forecasting, local government assistance, training facilities, Texas congressional redistricting, U.S. House districts

Transcript Highlights:

• This investment is especially important to women-owned, veteran-owned, minority-owned, immigrant-owned
• Our local small business groups... ...comment at least.
• Our local small business groups in Santa Clara that have historically been working to, obviously Santa
• Key elements include technical... minor inconsistencies and improve administrative efficiency.
• I'd like to express appreciation to the industry groups that have acknowledged this problem and have

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The committee began with announcements about consent items and then heard AB 72, which would create an electric vehicle economic opportunity zone in Riverside County. Supporters said the bill would help bring EV manufacturing jobs and training to the Inland Empire, while some senators questioned whether the state should favor one region over others and whether local economic development groups should handle the effort. The bill was passed on a roll call vote and sent to Senate Labor, Public Employment and Retirement. Members then took up AB 685, which would establish the Small Business Resiliency and Innovation Fund to support technical assistance and capital infusion programs for small businesses. The author and supporters emphasized the importance of TAP and related programs for women-owned, minority-owned, immigrant-owned, veteran-owned, and rural businesses, while some chambers of commerce raised concerns about amended eligibility language and whether the funding would be truly supplemental. After discussion, the bill was passed and sent to Senate Appropriations. The committee also approved ACR 173 on a 7-0 vote, and consent items AB 375 and AB 1587 were adopted 10-0. Later, AB 1760, a Dental Practice Act cleanup bill, and AB 1637, which would limit who may alter physician-authored medical records, both passed unanimously. AB 1785, allowing online sales of pseudoephedrine products with existing safeguards, also passed 10-0. AB 1973, expanding abortion-care authority for advanced practice clinicians, drew strong support and opposition and passed 7-3 after senators raised safety and training questions. AB 2025, requiring disclosures for digitally altered rental listings, passed 8-1, and AB 2697, allowing locally approved drive-through cannabis sales with security requirements, passed 7-3. The committee then heard AB 2249, which would tighten cannabis packaging rules to reduce child appeal, and the author described it as a response to poison-control calls and an audit finding that current law is too vague.

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you define or give an example of aiding and abetting a minor? Thank you, Madam Chair.
• A health care provider who may opt to do something prohibited by law on a minor, just to make sure I
• and that damages that can be recovered accrue to the benefit of affected minors.
• It couldn’t just be anybody coming and filing on behalf of that minor.
• If it's already illegal for minors, what are we even doing here?

Summary: The Committee on Children, Families, and Elder Affairs considered several bills. SB 590, by Senator Bradley, would toll the statute of limitations for failure to report suspected child abuse by mandatory reporters until the offense is known to law enforcement, with a retroactivity amendment adopted. Supporters said it would help hold mandatory reporters accountable in institutional abuse cases; it was reported favorably. SB 778, by Senator Simon, would update the definition of forensic client so certain individuals with intellectual disabilities or autism whose charges were dismissed for incompetency could be housed in the same secure setting under Chapter 916, reducing duplicative staffing and space needs at APD; it was also reported favorably. The committee then took up SB 560, by Senator Garcia, which streamlines psychotropic medication procedures for children in DCF custody, clarifies when new medical reports are needed, reduces duplicative background checks, and simplifies consent documentation. An amendment removed language expanding who could serve as a qualified evaluator and revised the Road to Independence Program changes to focus only on post-secondary education services and support, extending eligibility ages to 26 while keeping a five-year maximum. Members discussed fiscal impacts and funding sources, and the bill was reported favorably. Finally, the committee heard SB 1010, by Senator Yarbrough, which strengthens enforcement of existing prohibitions on sex-reassignment prescriptions and procedures for minors and adds civil and criminal penalties, along with Attorney General enforcement authority and related parental rights provisions. An amendment clarified that actions could be brought by individuals as well as the Attorney General and that the provisions apply only to minors. The bill drew extensive public testimony both for and against, with supporters emphasizing child protection and accountability and opponents warning about chilling effects on medical care, schools, and parental rights. Senators raised concerns about standing, scope, and impacts on teachers and clinicians, but the bill was ultimately reported favorably on a 5-1 vote, with Senator Sharif voting no.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are changing some of the membership of the study group, and we are going to replace...
• There's only three minorities.
• Actually, Citi Group, I think it was Citi Group, did a study where they said in a few years there'll
• No, I understand, but there is a difference between a study group and a task force.
• I was asked to bring this resolution by a group.

Bills: HB410, HR310, HR314, HR316, HR317, HR321, HR275, HR276, HR279, HR282, HR286, HR289, HR292, HR295, HR302, HR319, HR307, HR273, SCR59, SCR61, SCR62, SCR68, SCR69, SCR70, SCR54, SCR55, SCR64, SCR75, HCR32, HB776, HB42, HB119, HB159, HB302, HB1017, HB1028, SB217, SB283, HB953, SB208, HR74, HB998, HB901, HR20, HCR65, HCR71, HCR98, HB284, HB306, HB341, HB366, HB393, HB458, HB577, HB603, HB605, HB614, HB625, HB646, HB733, HB752, HB773, HB798, HB911, HB955, HB996, HB1035, HB1069, HB1113, HB1140, HB1180, HB1191, HB1240, HB1255, SB82, SB89, SB97, SB123, SB237, HB36, HB74, HB75, HB258, HB259, HB414, HB459, HB784, HB848, HB956, HB1095, HB1220, HB1252, SB469, SB479

Keywords: recording, privacy, notification, direct conversation, law enforcement, first responder, penalties, oil and gas, orphan wells, inactive wells, shut-in wells, marginal wells, plugging and abandonment, well decommissioning, site remediation, site restoration, Oilfield Site Restoration, OSR program, financial security, bonding

Transcript Highlights:

• Recognizing the minority whip.
• <00:19:23.520> to discretion to engineering groups to discretion to engineering groups to
• Recognizing the minority<00:58:46.320> leader. minority leader. minority leader.
• bill and instead extends the work group bill and instead extends the work group for<01:10:23.360
• group on post-operative cosmetic care. group on post-operative cosmetic care.

Keywords: House streaming session for Tuesday, March 10, 2026, 957, house, all

Summary: The House convened with 124 members present, offered a prayer, and recognized foster youth visiting the chamber. Members then adopted two House resolutions honoring Dr. Sonja Santelises for 10 years as CEO of Baltimore City Public Schools and recognizing Sigma Gamma Rho Sorority, Incorporated, for 104 years of service, scholarship, and sisterhood. The House also received Senate bills and began taking up committee reports. Several bills were reported favorably and advanced to third reading, including measures on higher education grants, public safety pay restrictions, retirement and pension system work group extensions and cost-of-living adjustments, synthetic turf and aquaculture studies, rail crew requirements, Howard County speed limits, election address confidentiality, IT investment fund uses, ethics financial disclosures, Public Information Act divorce records, aging-in-place grants, judicial assignments, clerk and register salaries, and firearm literature distribution. House Bill 428, concerning temporary assignment of former judges, was special ordered until the next day after the minority whip requested time for an amendment. The chamber also considered and adopted amendments on several bills. House Bill 437, the Transportation and Climate Alignment Act of 2026, was amended to exempt the Chesapeake Bay Bridge project and then special ordered after questions about greenhouse gas impacts on major highway expansion projects. House Bill 457 on menstrual hygiene products at higher education institutions, House Bill 538 on student enrollment disclosures, House Bill 561 on child care credential funding, House Bill 720 on a veterans scholarship, and House Bill 212 on out-of-state vehicle registration all received amendments and favorable reports as amended. HB 212 drew extended debate about Maryland residents using out-of-state tags, with supporters saying it would help enforce registration laws and opponents raising concerns about legislative вмешательство in vehicle regulation and enforcement discretion.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would watch groups of kids start to congregate.
• resolving these min minor ballot errors. resolving these min minor ballot errors.
• There is only one minor difference.
• areas of the law recognize that minor areas of the law recognize that minor children<01:57:51.599
• already classifies most data about minor already classifies most data about minor children<01:58

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And so I agree with the minority leader. The president is wrong on this one.
• So I agree with the minority leader.
• I also want to thank our esteemed minority leader.
• I am proud to belong to this group of people.
• So much for minority rights, so much for the voice of the people. Thirty seconds.

Summary: The Assembly met after a quorum call, recess, prayer, and the Pledge of Allegiance, then moved into a highly procedural and contentious floor session centered on redistricting measures. Members debated a point of order raised by Assembly Member DeMaio challenging the constitutionality of SB 280, ACA 8, and AB 604; the Speaker ruled the point not well taken, and the Assembly sustained that ruling on appeal. The body also took up consent-calendar and procedural motions, including suspending rules to adopt late amendments on ACA 8 and to bring the measure up without reference to file. Several motions to re-refer or suspend rules on related measures failed, while the motion to adopt the late amendments on ACA 8 carried. The main substantive item was ACA 8, the Assembly Constitutional Amendment related to redistricting, presented by Assembly Member Berman as a response to mid-decade redistricting efforts in other states, especially Texas. Supporters argued the measure was a temporary, voter-driven response to protect democracy, counter partisan gerrymandering, and address broader threats tied to the Trump administration, including immigration enforcement and health care cuts. Opponents argued ACA 8 would undermine California’s independent citizens redistricting commission, violate the state Constitution, and amount to partisan gerrymandering or a power grab. Members on both sides framed the issue as a defense of democracy, but disagreed sharply over whether the Legislature should act or leave redistricting to voters and the existing commission. No final vote on ACA 8 is shown in the transcript excerpt, but the Assembly did vote on several procedural matters: the appeal of the Speaker’s ruling was sustained 58-18; the motion to adopt late amendments on ACA 8 passed 58-19; a motion to re-refer ACA 8 and SB 280 to Judiciary failed 19-58; and a motion to take up A.J.R. 21 without reference to file failed 19-58. The session remained focused on ACA 8 and related redistricting questions, with extensive floor speeches from both supporters and opponents.

Transcript Highlights:

• LICENSES AND SAFE HOMES AND SAFE GROUP HOMES.
• I MET A GROUP OF KIDS TODAY, SELFLESS LOVE, THEY ARE HERE IN THE AUDIENCE. YOUTH ENGAGEMENT GROUP.
• EVERYBODY IN THAT GROUP HAS HAD EXPERIENCE IN THE FOSTER CARE SYSTEM.
• WE HAVE HEARD MANY INSTANCES OF GROOMING IN OUR GROUP HOMES IN PARTICULAR.
• HOWEVER, THIS GROUP WOULD BE SOMEWHAT AT RISK AND AND AT RISK GROUP OF FUTURE.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• happens instead is um outside groups happens instead is um outside groups tend<00:16:29.319>
• It reads: “First they came for a group, and I did not speak out because I was not of that group.
• <02:13:35.480> of to allow fearmongers to push a group of to allow fearmongers to push a group
• <02:21:53.240> of inflicts harm on a vulnerable group of inflicts harm on a vulnerable group
• we have a requirement that minorities we have a requirement that minorities have<04:46:04.200>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee opened a hearing on House Bill 148, with the chair limiting testimony to two minutes and asking for no outbursts so the committee could get through eight bills that day. Representative Kofalt, the prime sponsor, said HB 148 was the same as last year’s HB 396, which passed both chambers but was vetoed by the governor. He explained the bill would allow, but not require, separation by biological sex in bathrooms, locker rooms, houses of correction, and certain athletic competitions, leaving local school boards and administrators discretion to set policies. He argued the bill was meant to address safety and privacy concerns and cited a Milford incident and concerns in several school districts as examples of why local flexibility was needed. Committee members questioned the lack of a definition of “biological sex” and how the bill would be applied. Kofalt said he did not think a definition was necessary because males and females are generally understood, and he said the bill would give local policymakers latitude to make practical rules. He also said the bill was intended to address situations where people might misuse transgender claims to access spaces inappropriately. In response to questions, he said he was aware of issues in Kearsarge, Milford, and Mascoma school districts and had heard of discomfort in the State House, though he did not know all the details. Several opponents testified that the bill would discriminate against transgender and non-binary people and create enforcement problems. Executive Councilor Karen Hill said the bill would roll back New Hampshire’s anti-discrimination protections and conflict with the state’s Live Free or Die values. Alice Wade, a trans woman, said she had used women’s restrooms without incident and argued the bill would invite invasive enforcement and harassment. Representative La Selig said the bill was discriminatory and that bathroom concerns were being confused with unrelated harassment by cisgender males. Betsy Harrington supported the bill, citing a girls’ soccer game at Kearsarge that she said was disrupted by a boy playing on a girls’ team. Rosie Emer and her child testified against the bill, saying bathroom restrictions would increase anxiety and risk for trans and non-binary children. Stephen Scaer and Wendy Stallings supported the bill, arguing sex is biologically fixed and that excluding males from female spaces should not require genital inspections. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So you're knowingly providing a minor with this.
• So you're knowingly providing a minor with this.
• <00:31:28.880> But a minor with this. But a minor with this.
• Maybe Apple will have a competitive advantage, you know, amongst that group.
• Um, you know, I I I amongst that group.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee work session focused on House Bill 293, which would prevent minors from accessing obscenity on certain internet-connected electronic devices. Chair Pardell opened by noting the bill had been discussed several times and that the goal was to find language acceptable to the committee. Representative Coutab argued the bill is important for child safety, said parents vary in technical ability, and pointed to Apple as evidence that filtering tools can be implemented. He asked whether the other members saw a path forward and what it might look like. Representatives McFarland and Tur both said they support the underlying concern but questioned the bill’s structure and practicality. McFarland emphasized parental responsibility and individual liberty, said any final language should avoid infringing on rights or creating indirect pressure on corporations, and suggested looking at other states’ approaches and Apple’s closed ecosystem as a limited example. Tur said the bill may solve one problem while creating others, especially by placing the burden on device manufacturers and browsers rather than on the content providers; he cited the recent Texas Paxton decision as an example of a more targeted age-verification approach aimed at websites. Both expressed concern that a broad device-level mandate may be difficult to implement consistently across different platforms. Chair Pardell responded that the bill is intended to add protective measures rather than impose a blanket ban, and compared it to existing restrictions on minors accessing alcohol, tobacco, or pornographic magazines. She said the proposal is meant to ask for the user’s age during device setup, not to require identification or database checks, and stressed that parents would still be responsible for entering accurate information. Members also discussed whether Apple’s tools are generalizable to Android and other ecosystems, whether the market is already developing solutions, and whether a parent-facing filter or device-level controls would be the best route. Pardell said the committee had received public feedback and that another work session would likely be held in October; no vote or final action was taken.