Transcript Highlights:

• And I'm not a reckless person. I make sure my cars are safe.
• And I'm not a reckless<01:18:06.640><c> person.
• 18:07.360><c> sure</c><01:18:07.520><c> my</c><01:18:07.760><c> cars</c><01:18:08.000><c> are</c> reckless
• I make sure my cars are reckless person.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The PolyMet copper-nickel mine proposal, after years of political pressure on agencies to permit a reckless
• agencies<01:15:05.840><c> to</c><01:15:06.080><c> permit</c><01:15:06.400><c> a</c><01:15:06.560><c> reckless
• </c><01:15:07.080><c> and</c> agencies to permit a reckless and agencies to permit a reckless and dangerous

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• On page three, line six, it specifically says, ‘does not interfere,’ On page three, line six, it specifically
• says, ‘does not interfere with licensure requirements established by the participating state.’
• I want to make sure that we underscore that this does not interfere with licensure requirements established

Bills: SB540, HB1085, HB1484

Keywords: dentist, dental hygienist, dentistry, dental hygiene, licensure compact, interstate compact, professional licensing, license portability, health workforce, workforce shortage, mobility, compact privilege, state licensing board, public health, public safety, military spouse, telehealth dentistry, reciprocity, Title 59, occupational licensing

Summary: The Senate convened, established a quorum, and opened with prayer and several introductions, including the nurse of the day and student guests. The chamber then took up Senate Bill 540, a Department of Defense-request compact bill creating a dental/dental hygienist licensure compact. The author and supporters said it would improve reciprocity and help military spouses and workforce needs without lowering Oklahoma standards, while several senators raised concerns about sovereignty, rulemaking authority, potential enforcement actions, and possible costs. After debate, the bill passed 35-12. The Senate next considered House Bill 1085, which would standardize and adjust the fee structure for the service contract industry. An amendment changing dates was adopted, and the bill passed 44-3. The chamber then heard House Bill 1484, a fentanyl education bill requiring instruction for students in grades 6-12 on the dangers and consequences of fentanyl exposure. The author described it as a response to rising fentanyl deaths and a tribute to a young victim; the bill was said to apply to school districts and, by understanding, private schools as well. It passed 47-9 and then passed as an emergency measure. Before adjournment, senators also introduced visiting students and family members affected by fentanyl, and members made announcements about an appropriations subcommittee meeting and a Farm Bureau of Women lunch. The Senate then adopted a motion to adjourn until Thursday, February 12th at 9:30 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Government Operations and Military Affairs Committee be relieved of H541, an act relating to interference
• Government Operations and Military Affairs be relieved of House Bill 541, which is an act relating to interference
• Government Operations and Military Affairs be relieved of House Bill 541, which is an act relating to interference

Keywords: 926, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There is a lot of special interest that goes on and people's relationships, which then interfere with
• There is a lot of special interest that goes on and people's relationships, which then interfere with
• There is a lot of special interest that goes on and people's relationships, which then interfere with
• There is a lot of special interest that goes on and people's relationships, which then interfere with
• </c><01:31:42.120><c> with</c> relationships, which then interfere with relationships, which then interfere

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Economic Development and Tourism heard several governor’s message nominations to the Hawaii Tourism Authority’s advisory board. The first nominee, Daniel O’Leary, received strong support from HTA leadership and Deputy Director James Kunane Tokioka, who praised his visitor-industry knowledge and work on brand marketing and tourism planning. O’Leary said he hoped to contribute his experience and strengthen the organization’s integrity. Joel Guy was also supported by HTA, Tokioka, and several community testifiers, who highlighted his long work in Hana, his film-industry background, and his role in community-focused tourism planning. During questioning, Guy said the advisory board should still have influence, especially on strategic planning and community concerns, even though its role is advisory rather than decision-making. The committee then considered Linda Wong’s nomination. HTA and Tokioka strongly supported her, citing her long community experience and familiarity with HTA work. Wong said the new advisory board was collaborative, had no conflicts so far, and was trying to balance resident concerns with attracting higher-value tourists. Senator Kim questioned her about the advisory structure, and Wong said she believed the Legislature had reduced HTA’s authority because of past conflicts but that the new board could help turn things around and possibly regain more authority in the future. The committee also heard testimony on Kimberly Algos and Terry Fisher. Algos was described by HTA and Tokioka as a strong leader and solid board member; Tokioka explained that she and another co-chair were selected because of their busy schedules and that the advisory board’s committees were created so members could contribute beyond the single statutory duty of selecting the chair, president, and CEO. Fisher was supported for his tour-operator experience and strategic planning work. In questioning, he endorsed performance-based contracting and accountability for contractors, while acknowledging that external events can affect results. He also said the convention center is critical infrastructure that should be repaired and used to help fill tourism lulls and attract major conferences. The hearing included supportive testimony from industry representatives, but no votes or final actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The first is a core interference prohibition. The first is a core interference prohibition.
• A person shall not interfere with election administrators and election workers or voters or the conduct
• We've even had election interference from 51 national security officials who said a laptop was Russian
• This creates laws around interference with elections so that we have the same prohibitions in place for
• Interference today. Can you name where we need this new law?

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, opened with prayer and the Pledge, and agreed by unanimous consent to allow cameras on the floor and gallery, excuse several senators, and move to announcements and miscellaneous business. The chamber then adopted a ceremonial resolution honoring Lieutenant Governor Howie Morales for his years of service as Senate president and lieutenant governor, followed by extensive remarks from senators and Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham praising his leadership, fairness, education advocacy, and personal kindness. Morales briefly responded, thanking members, the governor, and his family, and noting he would offer fuller remarks on his final day. After messages from the House were read, the Senate adopted several committee reports. These included favorable action on Senate Memorial 31; House Judiciary Committee substitute for House Bill 70; House Bill 124, referred to Finance; Senate Joint Resolution 6, referred to Judiciary; Senate Joint Resolution 7; House Bills 103, 154, 165, and 285 as amended; and the Finance Committee’s amended report on House Appropriations and Finance Committee substitute for House Bills 2 and 3. The Judiciary Committee also reported Senate Bill 104 as duly enrolled and engrossed, and the body noted that SB 104 had been signed in open session. During personal privilege, Majority Floor Leader Peter Wirth discussed a State Ethics Commission advisory opinion on whether legislators who are attorneys may vote on medical malpractice cap legislation, arguing the issue is governed by Senate rules rather than the Governmental Conduct Act. He said he would continue to disclose his interests and vote under Rule 7-5, and also rejected a newspaper suggestion that he had a conflict in sponsoring a judgeship bill for the First Judicial District Court. The Senate then moved into third reading, beginning with Senate Rules Committee substitute for Senate Bill 264, which Senator Duhigg explained as an election-security measure responding to concerns about federal interference, intimidation, and emergency election disruptions; Senator Nava then spoke in support as a co-sponsor.

Transcript Highlights:

• and others declining offers, specifically citing concerns about the potential for legislative interference
• We are the owners of our educational path, and we can make these decisions without the over-interference
• This is what academic freedom without political interference allows, and this has been my experience
• We do not need political interference in our curriculum. Please oppose SB37. Thank you.
• This bill interferes with the content of core courses and causes professors to steer clear of open discussion

Bills: SB 37

Keywords: fetal development, education, public health curriculum, middle school, age-appropriate instruction, 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• alcohol, cannabis is less harmful to the body, less addictive, and less likely to cause violent or reckless
• alcohol, cannabis is less harmful to the body, less addictive, and less likely to cause violent or reckless
• alcohol, cannabis is less harmful to the body, less addictive, and less likely to cause violent or reckless
• alcohol, cannabis is less harmful to the body, less addictive, and less likely to cause violent or reckless
• alcohol, cannabis is less harmful to the body, less addictive, and less likely to cause violent or reckless

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committees on Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs and Agriculture and Food Systems heard testimony and began decision-making on HB 1246, which would establish the Hawaii Cannabis and Hemp Office within DCCA to regulate cannabis. Chair Tarnas described the bill as divisive and noted the hearing had received 95 testimonies in support, 135 in opposition, and 11 comments. Members were told the office would be administratively attached to DCCA, and the department emphasized it would not direct day-to-day operations. DCCA also raised concerns about banking access due to federal law, while the Department of Agriculture supported a one-plant, one-agency approach and noted its current authority over cannabis plant importation and movement. Several agencies and advocates supported the bill with cautions or requested amendments. The Department of Health said it appreciated the bill’s public health protections but remained concerned about increased adult-use access, youth mental health, pregnancy-related risks, and effects on developing brains; it requested a 12-month delayed effective date. The Attorney General’s office said legalization should include safeguards, recommended a longer implementation timeline and seed funding, and flagged issues in the bill involving impaired driving, open-container language, and penalties for under-21 possession. The Office of the Public Defender supported the bill but objected to new driving and possession offenses, saying existing law already covers impaired driving. Doctors for Drug Policy Reform supported the measure, citing regulation of intoxicating cannabinoids, testing, childproof packaging, and public education as public-health benefits. Opponents focused on youth access, public safety, and the bill’s broader social effects. The Honolulu Police Department opposed the bill over access and diversion concerns, and the City and County of Honolulu Prosecutor strongly opposed legalization, citing higher-potency cannabis, youth harms, psychiatric risks, and increased poison-center calls. The Hawaiʻi Substance Abuse Coalition argued legalization should wait until prevention programs are in place and funded first, while the Hawaiʻi Family Forum and Hawaiian Republican Women also opposed the measure, citing concerns about youth exposure, added bureaucracy, and taxpayer costs. The Tax Foundation of Hawaiʻi questioned the purpose of the proposed cannabis taxes, asking why cannabis should be taxed heavily if legalization is intended. The hearing continued with additional testimony after a brief audio issue for one testifier.

Transcript Highlights:

• A distributor may not interfere or attempt to influence a lessor's relationship with an organization
• A distributor may not interfere or attempt to influence a lessor's relationship with an organization
• or agent who approve the lease may not loan money or provide gaming equipment to an organization, interfere
• where it's talking about a lessor, and it goes on a little bit to talk about other people may not interfere
• attempt to influence over. and then it goes on a little bit to talk about other people, may not interfere

Summary: The Judiciary Interim Committee met to continue its study of charitable gaming, especially the ownership of alcoholic beverage establishments by licensed charitable gaming organizations and the relationship between charities, site owners, and gaming manufacturers/distributors. Legislative Council reviewed the background memo and Attorney General’s Gaming Division explained the legal framework, including site authorizations, rent limits, allowable expenses, and restrictions on distributors and manufacturers. Members focused heavily on electronic pull tabs, asking about the large gap between gross proceeds and adjusted proceeds, how much is paid out in winnings, how much is retained for expenses, and whether the 60% allowable-expense cap is being used as intended. The AG’s office said e-tabs account for most gaming volume, that winnings make up much of the difference, and that some organizations do not use the full 60% while others may exceed it, though only the capped amount counts as gaming expense. The committee also discussed the number of gaming organizations that appear to own or be affiliated with bars, the ways those ownership structures are formed, and whether some arrangements may create conflicts or site-selection pressure. The League of Cities and the Association of Counties described the local site-authorization process and recent model policies adopted after the 2025 session. Cities said they can require signed agreements, limit games and machines, set qualifications, and charge up to $100 for site authorization, but cannot require charities to donate net proceeds or force a specific charity or site. They said the new policies are meant to add transparency and local control, though the more controversial parts involve requiring a local nexus or community connection. County representatives said the issue is mostly a city matter and that counties generally take a lighter-touch approach. Committee members raised concerns about whether local rules could unfairly exclude larger regional charities or create inconsistent standards across cities. The North Dakota Gaming Alliance said it supports the study and provided information on charities that own or are affiliated with bars, emphasizing that most gaming organizations do not own alcoholic beverage establishments. Its representative said some charities may pursue bar ownership for site stability and diversification, while others decide against it because operating a bar is difficult. He also said a ban on charity-owned bars could raise federal tax-law issues depending on how it is written, and agreed to provide more detail. The committee asked Legislative Council and the Gaming Alliance for additional information on ownership structures and federal-law questions before the next meeting. Later, the Racing Commission gave a separate update on live racing, pari-mutuel wagering, and related charitable partnerships, and the State Hospital superintendent reported on the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s support services, staffing, and wait lists; no votes were taken on these presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• The state should not interfere with free speech rights of health care professionals.
• The state should not interfere with free speech rights of health care professionals.
• The state should not interfere<00:03:56.400><c> with</c><00:03:56.879><c> free</c><00:03:57.200><c> speech
• </c><00:03:57.599><c> rights</c><00:03:58.080><c> of</c> interfere with free speech rights of interfere
• with free speech that would interfere with free speech rights,<00:10:34.320><c> which</c><00:10:34.480

Bills: HB0143, HB0129

Keywords: health care providers, free speech, discrimination, governmental agencies, civil remedies, physician access, internationally trained physicians, medical licensing, provisional license, healthcare workforce, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Hennepin County are purposely keeping us in the dark so they can do whatever they want without our interference
• 59.159><c> our</c> can do whatever they want without our can do whatever they want without our interference
• 01.960><c> and</c><00:19:02.080><c> the</c><00:19:02.200><c> West</c><00:19:02.400><c> Broadway</c> interference
• WBC and the West Broadway interference WBC and the West Broadway businesses<00:19:03.400><c> are</c>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• This hearing will be recorded unless it interferes with the smooth running of the committee or if the
• This hearing will be recorded unless it interferes with the smooth running of the committee or if the
• principle that underpins everything is that these protections are meant to shield legislators from interference
• opposed something so simple about access to basic administrative and business records, that does not interfere
• with your work as legislators, that does not interfere with your constituent conversations.

Bills: H5004

Keywords: public records, public records law, transparency, open government, government accountability, legislature, general court, governor's office, executive records, legislative records, constituent communications, policy drafts, deliberative process, freedom of information, FOIA, records access, Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 66, Chapter 4, veterans services records, initiative petition

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-14, H 5-004, “an act to improve access to public records.” Chairs Cindy Friedman and Alice Peisch outlined the Article 48 process and explained that the committee was hearing expert testimony, then proponents, then opponents, before any public testimony. The first expert, Will Clark of the National Conference of State Legislatures, gave a general overview of public records laws across the states, emphasizing that all states have some form of open-records law but that exemptions, timelines, fees, and coverage of legislatures vary widely. He discussed legislative exemptions, legislative privilege, and court cases showing that outcomes often turn on the exact language of state constitutions, statutes, and chamber rules. Rebecca Murray, General Counsel for the Secretary of the Commonwealth, testified about Massachusetts public records administration, saying requests and appeals have risen sharply since the 2017 law update, with state agency requests increasing from 22,572 in 2017 to 47,776 in 2025 and appeals reaching a record 4,051 cases in 2025. She said the initiative would extend the law to the General Court and the Governor’s office and add exemptions for those branches, while warning that the volume and complexity of requests could require more resources. The proponents, led by Jesse Littlewood of the Coalition for Healthy Democracy, Scotia Hila of Act on Mass, and Auditor Diana DiZoglio, argued that Massachusetts is an outlier for exempting the legislature and governor from public records law and that the proposal would create needed accountability without exposing personal constituent communications or internal deliberations. They said the measure would make records such as committee votes, final bill drafts, amendments, expenditures, attendance records, minutes, and public testimony available, while preserving exemptions for constituent services, draft legislation, internal staff communications, and policy development discussions. DiZoglio emphasized that the initiative is aimed at basic administrative and financial records, citing her own difficulty obtaining receipts, contracts, and procurement documents, and said the public should be able to see how taxpayer dollars are spent. Committee members questioned the witnesses extensively about the scope of exemptions, constituent privacy, legislative privilege, and whether the measure could reach communications with nonprofits or lobbying-type interactions; proponents responded that privacy and constituent-service exemptions were intended to remain in place, though some members pressed for clearer statutory language. The hearing also included a contentious exchange over whether the initiative could affect legislative communications and whether the Senate had already taken a position against the measure. Some members raised concerns about separation of powers, legislative privilege, and the possibility of exposing constituent communications or internal deliberations, while proponents argued that the initiative was narrowly tailored and that any legal disputes could be resolved in court. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing. The committee concluded the testimony portion after hearing from the proponents and their questions, with the matter left pending for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• quote, 'All elections shall be free and equal, and no power, civil or military, shall at any time interfere
• So if he thought that there was some way ranked choice voting was going to somehow interfere with President
• House Bill 2281 requires that a state agency not impose an undue burden or interfere with the tribe's
• If foreign interference were to occur, the requirement would not be an effective safeguard.
• If foreign interference were to occur, the requirement would not be an effective safeguard.

Summary: The committee opened with member introductions and then heard House Bill 2123, which would change Washington’s foreign-national certification requirements for election contributions and political advertising. Staff explained that the proposed substitute would only require certifications for campaigns or sponsors exceeding a $5,500 threshold, with an amendment raising that threshold to $6,000, which would largely limit the requirement to ballot measure activity. Prime sponsor Rep. Joe Fitzgibbon said the current paperwork burden makes campaigns harder without solving a real problem, and that his proposal would preserve protections where federal law does not already cover ballot measures. Testifiers supporting the bill, including campaign treasurers, said the certification requirement is burdensome and ineffective; one witness raised concern that a related repeal provision might unintentionally allow foreign participation in state elections, and staff/leadership indicated follow-up would occur. The hearing on HB 2123 was then suspended and later reopened with additional supportive testimony from campaign professionals and others before the committee moved on to other bills. The committee then took up House Bill 2210 on ranked-choice voting for local elections. Staff said the bill would replace the current top-two primary structure with a top-five process for jurisdictions using ranked-choice voting, allow counties and other local governments to adopt the system through 2032, and set ballot, tabulation, rulemaking, and public education requirements; Seattle would be exempt because it is already moving toward ranked-choice voting. Rep. Gregerson, the sponsor, framed the bill as a temporary tool to protect free and fair elections amid federal uncertainty and potential Voting Rights Act changes. Supporters from Fair Vote Washington, the Washington Bus, Sightline Institute, and others argued ranked-choice voting can improve representation, reduce vote splitting, and help young, military, overseas, and underrepresented voters. Opponents, including Secretary of State Steve Hobbs, county auditors, and several citizens, said the system is confusing, costly, harder to audit, and may increase ballot rejection or lower participation, especially among communities of color and voters with limited English proficiency. The committee heard extensive debate but took no final action during the transcript. The committee also heard House Bill 2411, which expands the state shared leave program to cover employees who are victims of hate crimes or whose absences stem from immigration enforcement actions affecting themselves or family members. Rep. Osman Salahuddin said the bill responds to real cases where state workers faced detention or family separation and could not use shared leave under current law. OFM, the Office of Equity, and the Washington Federation of State Employees supported the bill, describing it as a humane, low-cost way to help employees remain employed during traumatic disruptions. A Republican member asked whether the change would apply to people not legally present or working under a visa; witnesses said they believed it would not, or would be extremely unlikely, and would follow state hiring documentation requirements. The hearing then closed on HB 2411. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 2281 on government-to-government consultation with tribes regarding state actions affecting tribal traditional cultural places. Staff said the bill would require mutually agreed consultation processes, timely notice, meaningful consultation before action, and a heightened legal standard requiring the state to show a compelling interest and least restrictive means if it would burden tribal cultural practices; tribes could sue in superior court. Rep. Chris Stearns said the bill is intended to protect Native identity, sacred sites, and religious practices from further loss, while tribal leaders and faith advocates strongly supported it as enforceable protection for sacred places and sovereignty. Some business and industry groups said they supported the goal but worried the bill’s broad definitions and cause of action could create permitting uncertainty, project delays, and significant costs, especially for clean energy and industrial projects. The committee also heard testimony on House Bill 2206, which would adopt the Uniform Military and Overseas Voters Act; supporters said it would streamline absentee voting for overseas and military voters, while opponents argued it could allow never-residents or duplicate registrations and raised constitutional concerns. No votes were taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• H.R. 2189 is a reckless expansion of the gun industry.
• HR<00:41:24.079><c> 2189</c><00:41:25.040><c> is</c><00:41:25.280><c> a</c><00:41:25.520><c> reckless
• expansion of the HR 2189 is a reckless expansion of the gun<00:41:27.599><c> industry.
• This is reckless. It is dangerous, and it must stop.
• Five more seats to continue to be the reckless, ruthless, lawless president that he is.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Thursday, February 12, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Any knowing or reckless violation of Any knowing or reckless violation of Any knowing or reckless violation
• subsection A is part of a consistent subsection A is part of a consistent pattern of knowing or reckless
• conduct, pattern of knowing or reckless conduct, pattern of knowing or reckless conduct, the attorney

Keywords: 920, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It does not interfere with the physician-patient relationship.
• But I don't think this bill interferes. We just want to be clear on the record.
• But I don't think this bill interferes. We just want to be clear on the record.
• This is not meant to interfere with what the court needs to actually see and be able to...
• This is not meant to interfere with what the court needs to, but.

Bills: HB414, HB786, HB1041, HB1052, HB1118, HB1139, HB1182, HB1185, HB1214, HB1217, HB1231, SR63, SCR27, SB5, SB194, SB415, SB433, SB451, SB462, SB516

Keywords: healthcare, criminal convictions, employment, background checks, prohibited offenses, Medicaid, claim payments, extrapolation, provider audits, medical freedom, discrimination, access, medical intervention, child protection, confidentiality, multidisciplinary teams, child advocacy centers, public records, investigations, hospital

Transcript Highlights:

• people either did not read the rules and regulations or they read them and figured that they wouldn't interfere
• people either did not read the rules and regulations or they read them and figured that they wouldn't interfere
• that read them in fig that they didn't that that<00:29:29.519><c> wouldn't</c><00:29:29.840><c> interfere
• </c><00:29:30.279><c> with</c><00:29:30.480><c> them</c><00:29:31.240><c> and</c> that wouldn't interfere
• with them and that wouldn't interfere with them and then<00:29:31.559><c> they</c><00:29:31.679><c>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It does not include reckless or negligent.
• What would take out manslaughter and second degree and reckless? 630:1-a, 630:1-a, 630:1-a.
• First, it interferes with people's First Amendment free speech and freedom of assembly rights.
• First, it interferes<04:07:40.640><c> with</c><04:07:40.800><c> people's</c><04:07:41.120><c> first</
• c><04:07:41.359><c> amendment</c> interferes with people's first amendment interferes with people's first

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee opened a hearing on Senate Bill 141, which would create a narrow exception to New Hampshire’s three-year deadline for motions for a new trial when a petitioner has newly discovered evidence, new forensic testing, or new scientific understanding. The prime sponsor’s representative and advocates from the Innocence Project and New England Innocence Project argued the bill is needed to help wrongfully convicted people access the courts, noting that exonerations often take many years and that outdated forensic science has contributed to wrongful convictions. The chair also said he had drafted a proposed amendment for committee review, but it had not yet been formally submitted. Witnesses supporting the bill emphasized that the measure would not guarantee relief, only allow a petition to be filed and reviewed under existing standards. They discussed examples such as arson science, explaining that some convictions were based on forensic methods later shown to be unreliable. Committee members asked about the scope of habeas corpus, whether the bill would create a new cause of action, and whether additional screening or pleading requirements should be added. The supporters said they would be open to requiring a petitioner to plead innocence, but opposed adding more burdensome preliminary procedures or counsel requirements at the filing stage. Thomas Farardi, from the Attorney General’s Office, testified in opposition or with caution, saying the bill was a “solution looking for a problem” because existing habeas corpus and coram nobis procedures already provide avenues for relief, and prosecutors can act when credible new evidence arises. He argued the current draft could invite additional litigation and create a new cause of action, and said he favored more screening before cases proceed. The discussion also touched on whether the statute applies in criminal cases, the current three-year limitation in RSA 526:4, and questions about posthumous petitions and petitions by deported individuals. No vote or executive action was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• would protect members of the public, journalists, and others against frivolous lawsuits that would interfere
• It would protect members of the public, journalists, others against frivolous lawsuits that would interfere

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on Senate Bill 1067, a Uniform Public Expression Protection Act intended to deter meritless “SLAPP” lawsuits that can chill free speech by forcing defendants into costly litigation. The bill sponsor explained that it would apply to speech on matters of public concern, including social media and political speech, and would allow an expedited motion and immediate appeal so a plaintiff must show early that the case has merit. Members asked about examples, whether defamation and true harmful speech would still be actionable, and whether the bill would strain courts; the sponsor said it would not eliminate valid claims and would likely reduce court burden by resolving weak cases sooner. Witnesses testified in support, including the Missouri Press Association, the Institute for Free Speech, the Missouri Broadcasters Association, and Missouri Right to Life. Supporters said journalists, broadcasters, and ordinary citizens are frequent targets of meritless suits meant to silence reporting or other protected expression, and noted the bill was similar to prior versions that had advanced with bipartisan support. One witness said the measure mirrors language adopted in many other states and simply moves the summary-judgment-type review earlier in the process, before lengthy discovery. No witnesses spoke in opposition or for informational purposes. The hearing concluded without a vote, and the committee adjourned after closing the public hearing on SB 1067.

Transcript Highlights:

• Nothing radical,<01:53:58.480><c> nothing</c><01:53:58.800><c> reckless,</c><01:53:59.520><c> just</c
• ><01:53:59.760><c> the</c> radical, nothing reckless, just the radical, nothing reckless, just the simple
• it was said in the opening by the good senator from Greenwood Village, nothing radical, nothing reckless
• continues: The opening by the good senator from Greenwood Village said nothing radical, nothing reckless
• </c> nothing reckless. nothing reckless.

Keywords: 981, all