Transcript Highlights:

• enforcement and works for a county law enforcement agency, I see as our communities have grown, law
• </c><00:11:10.560><c> So</c> law now that I just read. So law now that I just read.
• So you can enforce laws that you currently have on the book that mirror state law.
• So you can enforce laws that you currently have on the book that mirror state law.
• </c> &gt;&gt; law the land for basically ever. &gt;&gt; law the land for basically ever.

Bills: HB450 , HB469 , SB298 , HB450 , HB638 , HB469 , SB298

Committee: House Public Safety and Homeland Security

Keywords: HB450, judges, judicial office, constitutional amendment, Alabama Constitution, age limit, mandatory retirement, judicial eligibility, supernumerary judge, judicial retirement, state judicial retirement benefits, election law, appointment, voter approval, ballot measure, Judiciary Committee, ambulance services, balance billing, health insurance, emergency transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• And as law enforcement officers, we don't know.
• Kraft that creating new laws... ...creating new laws.
• , it's not administrative law.
• , it's not administrative law.
• So if we include a directive in state law for the court to develop a set of rules for family law matters

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Child Custody Review Task Force met with a quorum, approved the prior meeting minutes, and reviewed a memorandum compiling member suggestions for possible legislation. The memo grouped ideas into topics including creation of a family court, expanded education for parents, attorneys, and judges, expedited hearings for parenting-time violations, limiting law enforcement involvement in custody disputes, creating parenting time expediters, and adopting more uniform court procedures. Members also discussed whether to form subcommittees, but the task force decided to continue working as a full committee rather than create subcommittees at this time. The committee then heard testimony from Dr. John Perez, a mental health professional, who described his personal custody experience and his professional work with families he believes have been affected by parental alienation. He argued for stronger education, faster court response times, and better tools to address intentional interference with parenting time. Members questioned him about his case history, the concept of parental alienation, and whether specialized family courts or judges with family-law training could help. Dr. Perez said a dedicated family court and faster hearings would likely have helped his situation. The task force spent substantial time discussing the possible creation of a family court. Judge Hovey supported the idea of a specialized family court or at least a study of one, saying family cases are distinct from ordinary adversarial litigation and that judges with family-law experience could better handle them. Several members agreed that a family court could improve consistency, expertise, and speed, but others cautioned that the task force’s current directive is focused on enforcement of existing orders rather than broader custody policy, and noted that voters had previously rejected equal shared parenting proposals. The group also discussed expedited procedures for parenting-time disputes, with Judge Hovey suggesting a 30-day hearing timeline may be workable. On education, members generally supported requiring parents to complete a parenting education course and adding educational materials explaining court process, child support, and what judges can and cannot do. Mr. McLean suggested a short instructional video for litigants and more family-law education for judges and attorneys, while Ms. Moldenhauer said education could be incorporated into scheduling orders or mediation orders. Members also discussed the Parents Forever course, including whether it should be mandatory in all counties and whether cost is a barrier; no vote was taken on any of these proposals.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have laws in place.
• In a top law school. And you know what came out on top? In a top law school, Bentley's Law did.
• So as a law enforcement officer and as a dad and as a Missourian, I stand behind Bentley's Law and I
• I don't think that law has changed.
• It says that any rule may be annulled by law, by function of law, and general interpretation of that

Committee: House Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence

Summary: The committee held public hearings on House Bill 3144 and House Bill 3160, both dealing with appeals of preliminary injunctions. The sponsors said the bills would allow a party to appeal a preliminary injunction more broadly, rather than limiting that right to the Attorney General, and they described the measure as a response to prior litigation and equal protection concerns. Supporters, including a Campaign Life Missouri lobbyist and Attorney General’s office counsel, argued the change would align Missouri practice with federal interlocutory appeal rules and protect both sides from harm while litigation is pending. Some members questioned whether the bills were aimed at pending Amendment 3 litigation and raised concerns about fairness and whether the language should apply evenly to all parties; the sponsors said one bill would be amended to match the other. No vote was taken on these bills during the hearing. The committee then heard House Bill 1910, “Bentley and Mason’s Law,” which would require a person convicted of driving while intoxicated or drug-impaired driving that causes the death of a parent or guardian to pay child maintenance to the surviving children, with support continuing until age 18 or longer if the child is in college, and with arrearages addressed after release from incarceration. Representative Williams and several family members and victims testified in strong support, describing the bill as a deterrent and a way to hold impaired drivers financially accountable for the children left behind. Supporters said similar laws have passed in other states and cited a Tennessee case as an example of the law working in practice. Committee members asked about how maintenance would be calculated, whether the offender’s income would be considered, how civil judgments would interact with the maintenance order, and whether arrearages should accrue during incarceration; the sponsor said the bill could be refined and that those issues could be worked out. Opposition to HB 1910 was limited, but one law enforcement witness said he supported the concept despite being listed as opposition, and another witness from MADD strongly endorsed the bill. The hearing ended with no action on HB 1910. In executive session, the committee voted HJR 130 do pass by a vote of 13-0. It then considered HB 2086, a bill relating to the practice of law, which drew constitutional and separation-of-powers concerns from several members; the final vote was 7-7, and the bill was reported as due pass despite the tie.

Transcript Highlights:

• The CAC model brings together law and Its conclusion, sometimes years later.
• In June of 2020, the Governor signed into law Jordan's Law.
• So in Pinellas, we have 10 local law enforcement agencies.
• “In particular, some law enforcement agencies prefer to do their own.
• And so it is noticed by law enforcement that there is a high turnover.

Committee: Senate Children, Families, and Elder Affairs

Summary: The Senate Committee on Children, Families, and Elder Affairs held a panel discussion on Florida’s child protection teams (CPTs), child advocacy centers (CACs), and the related roles of DCF, DOH, and law enforcement. Testimony from DCF, the Department of Health, a local CAC director, the Florida Network of Children’s Advocacy Centers, a Pinellas County CPT nurse practitioner, and a Jacksonville sheriff’s sergeant described how the system is intended to work: hotline reports are screened by DCF, mandatory referrals are sent to CPT, forensic interviews and medical exams are coordinated through CPT/CACs, and multidisciplinary teams share findings with law enforcement and prosecutors. Speakers emphasized the value of co-location, telemedicine, multidisciplinary staffings, and trauma-informed practices to reduce repeated interviews and improve child safety and case outcomes. Committee members focused heavily on communication breakdowns, staffing shortages, and delays in response times. Senators raised Jordan’s Law and asked what had been done to improve coordination among DCF, CPT, and law enforcement. Several members questioned whether the promised 24-hour response standard is being met in practice, citing reports of delayed referrals, delayed forensic interviews, and bottlenecks that can affect medical evaluations and criminal investigations. Law enforcement testimony from Jacksonville described cases where CPT interviews were scheduled one to two weeks out and reports were not received for weeks, while DCF acknowledged average CPI caseloads of about 12 investigations and turnover commonly occurring within 12 to 18 months. The panel also discussed access gaps and funding concerns. The Florida Network of CACs said Florida has 26 member centers, with some counties lacking CAC coverage and some centers having closed due to funding challenges. Speakers said CACs are voluntary but critical for integrated services, and that workforce shortages in medical and mental health providers limit expansion. DCF and DOH representatives said they would provide follow-up information on the number of CPT medical staff and other requested data. No bills were voted on; the meeting ended with committee members requesting additional information and recommendations for statutory and budgetary changes, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> make a mockery of our immigration laws make a mockery of our immigration laws can<00:27:02.799><
• </c><00:28:39.360><c> a</c><00:28:39.559><c> future</c> laws but without this law a future laws but without
• That we actually take law and order seriously, that we enforce the laws that are on the books.
• That's what the law is.
• That's what the law is.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Tuesday, January 7, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• these laws.
• One, proponents misstate the law.
• I'm like, look at the law.
• to enforce the existing laws.
• Sue Kim on Common Law in support. Sue Kim on Common Law in support.

Summary: The committee heard AB 82, which would expand privacy and safety protections for patients and providers of reproductive and gender-affirming care. The author and supporters said the bill is needed because of rising harassment, doxing, and threats, and because sensitive health data could be used by hostile actors; opponents argued it would create constitutional problems, enable abuse of safe-at-home protections, and improperly shield providers and records from scrutiny. Public testimony was heavily divided, with many advocates in support and many privacy, civil liberties, and anti-trafficking or sex-based policy groups in opposition. The bill was moved on a due pass recommendation and remained on call. The committee then heard AB 331, which would clarify that county election certification is a ministerial duty, prohibit misleading ballot return envelopes, and require voter information guides to be delivered to jails in an acceptable format. The Department of Justice and several good-government groups supported the measure, the Secretary of State had no position after amendments, and a committee member noted ongoing concerns but supported it after the changes. The bill passed on a do pass recommendation to Appropriations and was placed on call. AB 1178 followed, proposing to protect undercover peace officers’ names, images, and likenesses in public records while preserving disclosure of sustained misconduct records. Law enforcement and public safety groups supported the bill as a needed safety measure, while journalists, transparency advocates, and civil liberties groups opposed it, saying existing law already protects officers and the new language could lead to overbroad withholding. After discussion about the scope of undercover status and the need for judicial discretion, the bill passed as amended to Appropriations. The committee also adopted a consent calendar. Later, AB 981 was heard, creating a five-county pilot program requiring intelligent speed assistance devices for certain reckless driving convictions. Supporters, including traffic safety advocates and crash victims, said the bill could reduce repeat speeding and save lives; opponents raised concerns about cost, installer oversight, liability for automakers, and the breadth of the pilot. The bill passed as amended to Appropriations. AB 22, which would repeal Proposition 57 and restrict release of sexually violent predators and certain sex offenders, drew strong opposition from youth justice, public defender, and civil liberties groups who said it would be unconstitutional and harmful; the chair recommended no, no motion was made, and the bill was held. Finally, AB 897, a squatter-removal bill, was presented with the author arguing it would protect property owners through a faster due-process process; the transcript cuts off during early support testimony and does not show a final action on that measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• California should continue. ...in our elections and law enforcement.
• At best, this language is vague and could be used to attack a lawful investigation by law enforcement
• Further, the bill highlights. ...is vague and could be used to attack a lawful investigation by law enforcement
• enforcement that is required by law to investigate alleged crimes.
• There is basically no accountability to the federal law.

Committee: House Public Safety

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If this crisis still exists, the law has failed.
• They've relied on fear to keep this law in place.
• If the solution that is desired is that we change this law, then the law can be changed with reciprocal
• That section of law denies access to the courts.
• Under Florida law, that section of law denies access to the courts, carves out a section of vulnerable

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met to consider HB 6003, a bill to repeal Florida’s “free kill” law that limits certain survivors’ ability to recover non-economic damages in medical negligence wrongful death cases. The sponsor, Rep. Trabulsy, said the bill would restore access to the courts for a small class of families and noted the measure passed both chambers last year before being vetoed by the governor. She and supporters framed the bill as a fairness and constitutional issue, while opponents argued repeal would increase malpractice exposure, insurance costs, and pressure on physician access, especially in high-risk specialties and rural areas. Public testimony was sharply divided. Supporters included family members who described deaths they said were caused by medical negligence and who argued the current law denies accountability and equal treatment based on marital status or whether a decedent had minor children. Opponents included the Florida Hospital Association, Florida Medical Association, Florida Chamber, U.S. Chamber, Florida Insurance Council, and other health care and business groups, who warned that repeal could worsen already high malpractice premiums, contribute to physician shortages, and destabilize access to care. Several speakers on both sides discussed possible caps on non-economic damages as a compromise, though the bill itself was presented as a clean repealer with no amendments. During debate, several members spoke in support, emphasizing equal access to the courts and rejecting the idea that the law should treat some families differently from others. Opponents of the bill argued that the current system helps preserve market stability and that liability concerns, not the free kill law, are driving provider departures. After closing remarks from the sponsor, the committee voted 15 yeas and 1 nay to report HB 6003 favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• I have an advanced law degree in child and family law.
• The law that is proposed here is a drastic change in current law.
• Law Institute.
• It's already the law.
• Kunkle with the Law Institute.

Committee: Senate Judiciary A

Keywords: 974, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Under the, so under current law, adding it does not elevate it to a Class C felony.
• So there's already a pattern for this in the law.
• enforcement and federal law enforcement and the legislature passing laws where they can't share information
• enforcement, and law enforcement has been working with them for a long time.
• And, yes, of course, we want law enforcement to be involved. One last question.

Summary: The committee heard staff briefings and sponsor testimony on four bills. House Bill 2310 would elevate fourth-degree assault with a finding of sexual motivation to a Class C felony after two prior qualifying convictions within 10 years, with discussion focused on when sex-offender registration would apply and whether the bill would capture repeat conduct that is often pled down. The sponsor said the bill responds to a constituent’s experience and is intended to increase accountability for repeat offenders. Testimony was split: prosecutors and law enforcement supported the bill as a practical way to address repetitive sexual-motivation assaults, while defense advocates warned it would trigger major sex-offense consequences, including registration, prison time, immigration consequences, and possible sentencing disproportionality. No vote was taken and the hearing was held open. House Bill 1239, the reentry readiness bill, would increase earned release time to up to 33.33% for eligible offenses committed on or after July 1, 2026, make certain enhancements eligible for earned release time, create a two-year peer-support pilot for incarcerated survivors of sexual violence and intimate partner violence at the Washington Corrections Center for Women, and require victim-notification materials about sentencing changes. The sponsor and supporters said it would improve reentry, reduce recidivism, and better prepare people for release, while the Sentencing Guidelines Commission said it aligns with prior recommendations for consistency in earned release. Prosecutors opposed the bill, arguing it mainly shortens sentences rather than improving reentry and could reduce accountability. The hearing remained open. House Bill 1228 would allow blood and breath toxicology testing to be considered valid if performed by a lab certified under ISO/IEC 17025, in addition to current state toxicologist methods. The sponsor and several local officials said Washington’s toxicology backlog is causing long delays, sometimes over 300 days, which slows charging decisions and can allow repeat DUI behavior before cases are filed. Supporters said private accredited labs could provide a local option and speed results, while defense advocates asked for discovery protections if outside labs are used. County and law enforcement representatives supported the concept but cautioned against shifting costs to counties and creating unequal access based on local resources. The sponsor indicated an amendment would remove out-of-state labs and add a five-year report-back. House Bill 2464 would require private detention facilities to report serious incidents such as abuse, neglect, deaths, suicides, injuries requiring hospitalization, and service disruptions to the Department of Health and local law enforcement within one business day, and would require annual reporting by law enforcement on calls and follow-up actions. The sponsor said the bill is aimed at transparency and ensuring that incidents in private detention facilities are not hidden. Testimony from advocates, journalists, and researchers described alleged abuse, suicides, hunger strikes, fires, and barriers to reporting at the Northwest ICE Processing Center in Tacoma, and said the bill would improve public access to information. Law enforcement representatives said the bill affects only two agencies and urged the committee to consider the cumulative burden of reporting mandates and the public-trust implications of involving local agencies in federal detention issues. The hearing on this bill was also held open.

Transcript Highlights:

• So members, we are here to interpret laws and make laws. We are here to interpret rules.
• </c><00:54:06.960><c> We</c><00:54:07.119><c> are</c> interpret laws and make laws.
• We are interpret laws and make laws.
• </c> students, our law enforcement in St. students, our law enforcement in St.
• </c> democracy is the rule of law. democracy is the rule of law.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• enforcement to put forward the police officer law enforcement scholarship Act of 2025.
• ><c> police</c><00:01:52.640><c> officer</c><00:01:53.399><c> law</c> forward the police officer law
• Ross, can you talk a little bit about law enforcement running in the family?
• </c> somebody who's whose parent was a law somebody who's whose parent was a law enforcement<00:21:08.559
• </c> facing our state with regards to law facing our state with regards to law enforcement<00:23:35.840

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I have to thank our partners in law enforcement.
• We allow law enforcement to carry out their duties.
• Not a gesture, a genuine law.
• No law enforcement officer or other employee or representative of a law enforcement agency.
• decision carries the weight of a court of law.

Summary: The House first handled several routine matters, including adoption of a resolution honoring Caroline San Martino Moran on her 80th birthday and suspension of Joint Rule 12 to allow consideration of a petition involving the City of Waltham and the Veterans Memorial Rink. It then advanced a bill authorizing DCAMM to release a sewer line easement in West Roxbury, adopting the Ways and Means amendment and ordering the bill to a third reading. The chamber also took up and advanced another bill, Promoting Rule of Law, Oversight, Trust, and Equal Constitutional Treatment (the “Protect Act”), after a brief recess and a quorum call. Most of the transcript focused on House Bill 5305, the Protect Act, which was described by supporters as a measure to separate state and local law enforcement from civil immigration enforcement, prohibit ICE arrests in courthouses without a judicial warrant, limit cooperation with ICE on civil matters, strengthen notice and language-access protections for detainees and workers, expedite U and T visa certifications, and create rules for sensitive spaces and enforcement by the Attorney General. Supporters from both parties and several caucuses argued the bill would protect due process, encourage victims and witnesses to come forward, and preserve public safety by maintaining trust in courts, schools, and communities. Several members also spoke from personal experience as immigrants, survivors of domestic violence, or law enforcement professionals. The House considered and voted on a series of amendments to H.5305. Amendment 6 to strike Section 4 failed; Amendment 7, which would have required ICE civil warrants to be presented to a court and reviewed for impact on justice, failed; Amendment 2, adding immigration judges to the bill’s definition of government, failed; Amendment 3, concerning 287(g) agreements and federal reimbursement, was withdrawn; Amendment 13, expediting U visa certifications when a family member is aging out, was adopted by roll call 150-3; Amendment 10, clarifying the definition of law enforcement agency/officer to include sheriffs’ correctional roles, was adopted 127-25; Amendment 5, expanding a release-date provision, was adopted 154-0; and Amendment 14, addressing school-related protections and ICE presence, was adopted 135-18. The bill itself was still under consideration at the end of the transcript, with debate continuing after the adopted amendments.

Transcript Highlights:

• law.
• Well, we are either a nation of law or we're not a nation of law. We have immigration law.
• E-Verify is not the law. Our industries are following the law.
• We are a law-and-order state. We follow laws in the state.
• law sets.

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• AMEND THE LABOR LAW. &gt;&gt; READ THE LAST SECTION.
• &gt;&gt; CALENDAR 67, 9492 ASSEMBLYMEMBER REYES, AN ACT TO AMEND THE SOCIAL SERVICES LAW.
• ASSEMBLYMEMBER PAULIN, AN ACT TO AMEND THE SOCIAL SERVICES LAW. &gt;&gt; READ THE LAST SECTION.
• &gt;&gt; CALENDAR 70, ASSEMBLY 9445 ASSEMBLYMEMBER PAULIN, AN ACT TO AMEND THE SOCIAL SERVICES LAW.
• &gt;&gt; CALENDAR 92, ASSEMBLY 9506 ASSEMBLYMEMBER WALKER, AN ACT TO AMEND THE SOCIAL SERVICES LAW.

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate met on January 28, 2026, approved the prior day’s Journal, and then took up a series of messages from the Assembly to discharge bills from committee and substitute identical Senate bills for third reading. The chamber then proceeded through the calendar, considering measures in public health, business, labor, social services, economic development, agriculture and markets, education, county law, and general business law. Several senators briefly explained votes, including Senator Bailey, who spoke in support of Calendar 67 and asked to be recorded in the affirmative. Most bills passed with broad support, though some drew limited opposition. Notable negative votes included Calendar 64 (4 nays), Calendar 66 (1 nay), Calendar 70 (1 nay), Calendar 73 (2 nays), Calendar 77 (18 nays), Calendar 78 (2 nays), Calendar 80 (2 nays), and Calendar 92 (2 nays). At the end of the session, the Senate completed the reading of the day’s calendar, reported no further business at the desk, and moved to adjourn until Tuesday, February 3 at 3:00 p.m., with intervening days designated as legislative days.

Transcript Highlights:

• Local law receive pro forma training in immigration law and then go out and are empowered to arrest immigrants
• This is all through law, enacted law.
• All of these state laws explicitly allow state and local cooperation with federal law enforcement to
• This fear doesn't come from the law.
• Law-abiding. justification for deporting them.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused on the Safe Communities Act, House 2580 and Senate 1681, along with related proposals to limit local and state cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, prohibit 287(g) agreements, and expand legal defense for immigrants. Most testimony came from advocates, attorneys, labor leaders, health care professionals, educators, and community members who argued that fear of ICE discourages immigrants from reporting crimes, seeking medical care, attending school, or cooperating with courts, and that a clear statewide policy would improve public safety, due process, and trust in institutions. Several speakers described personal or client experiences involving domestic violence, trafficking, workplace abuse, or children affected by deportation, and many emphasized economic harms to workers, families, and small businesses. Health care witnesses said immigration enforcement is causing patients to miss appointments, avoid emergency rooms, and delay preventive care, with resulting public health consequences. Labor and education representatives said immigrant workers and students are increasingly fearful, and that the state should not allow local police to act as ICE agents or enter 287(g) agreements. ACLU and coalition witnesses cited examples they said showed existing or recent collaboration between local agencies and ICE, including courthouse alerts, vehicle stops, and use of municipal spaces, while also arguing that the bill would still allow cooperation on criminal matters and public safety emergencies. One witness opposed the bill, arguing that serious criminal offenders should be deported and defending ICE’s role. Committee members asked several questions about whether the harms described were widespread or anecdotal, and about the distinction between assisting ICE in civil immigration arrests versus responding to violent or public safety emergencies. Witnesses said the bill was aimed at civil immigration enforcement, not criminal investigations or emergency situations. At the end of the hearing, a committee member requested a study on immigration enforcement’s effect on emergency room wait times, and the committee then adjourned without taking a vote on the legislation.

Transcript Highlights:

• will start with the first bill, Senate Bill 3868, by Senator Bailey: an act to amend the Insurance Law
• The second bill on the agenda, Senate Bill 4867A, by Senator Fady: an act to amend the Insurance Law
• The next bill on the agenda, Senate Bill 5263 by Senator Ashby: an act to amend the Insurance Law in
• the State Finance Law in relation to establishing the Strength and Homes Program.
• State Finance Law in relation to establishing the Strength and Homes Program.

Committee: Senate Insurance

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Insurance met and considered a long agenda of bills focused on health coverage, insurance regulation, and related consumer protections. Measures discussed included coverage for infant formula, restrictions on step therapy for serious mental health conditions, physical and occupational therapy services, outpatient substance use disorder treatment without pre-authorization, mortgage guarantee insurance, patient navigation services, specialized dental benefit plan information, firefighter medical exams, the Strength and Homes Program, accident prevention course instruction, early egg and peanut allergy coverage, speech therapy for stuttering, dog-breed-related insurance restrictions, insurer advertising requirements, prescription drug substitution during shortages, and notice of long-term care rate increases. Members also discussed the rationale for some bills, including concerns about outdated advertising rules and the importance of allergy-related coverage for children. Most bills were moved favorably, with several reported to the floor and others referred onward to the Finance Committee, Substance Use Disorder Committee, or Transportation Committee. Notable referrals included the infant formula, patient navigation, allergy coverage, stuttering therapy, and drug shortage substitution bills to Finance; the substance use disorder bill to the Substance Use Disorder Committee; and the accident prevention course bill to Transportation. Bills on mental health step therapy, mortgage guarantee insurance, specialized dental plan information, firefighter exams, dog breed restrictions, and insurer advertising requirements were reported to the floor. The committee also took recorded votes, with some members noted as without recommendation or without recusal on certain bills, and Senator Helming recorded in the negative on the long-term care rate increase notice bill. Overall, the meeting concluded with all agenda items acted on and no bill defeated outright.

Transcript Highlights:

• There is very, very clear case law on this. There is very, very clear case law on this.
• There's a court of law.
• But law-abiding citizens are not.
• This law does not.
• That's currently in California law.

Summary: The committee heard several bills, beginning with AB 1521, the Judiciary Committee’s civil law omnibus measure. The bill makes a number of minor, mostly clarifying changes, including repealing obsolete Government Code provisions, allowing juvenile courts to hear petitions to establish records of birth, death, or marriage, requiring notice of probate petitions to the Department of Child Support Services, and correcting typos in existing law. It had no opposition and was moved on a do-pass basis to Appropriations, though it was later placed on call pending additional votes. Members then heard AB 57, which would reserve at least 10% of California’s Home Purchase Assistance Program funds for descendants of formerly enslaved people. The author and supporters framed it as a reparative, race-neutral-by-lineage effort to address historic housing discrimination and the racial wealth gap, while opponents argued it was an unconstitutional racial proxy and should instead be based on individual injury. The bill drew strong support and opposition testimony, was amended, and was approved on a do-pass as amended vote to Appropriations, then placed on call. AB 495, the Family Preparedness Plan Act, was heard next. The bill would expand and standardize caregiving and guardianship tools for families facing immigration-related separation, including broader use of caregiver authorization affidavits, recognition of non-relative extended family caregivers, and a new short-term guardianship process that preserves parental rights. Supporters said it would reduce trauma and help children remain with trusted caregivers; there was no opposition testimony. The committee approved it on a do-pass to Human Services vote and placed it on call. The committee also heard AB 392, which would address non-consensual sharing of sexually explicit media by requiring uploader consent certifications, faster takedown procedures, and civil remedies against uploaders and hosting sites. A survivor testified in support, and members discussed implementation details and possible amendments; the bill was moved on a do-pass as amended basis to Appropriations and placed on call. AB 692, which would prohibit employer “stay-or-pay” debt agreements that require workers to repay training or other costs if they leave or are terminated, also advanced despite opposition from business and industry groups concerned about impacts on signing bonuses and voluntary training programs. It was sent to Appropriations on a do-pass as amended vote and placed on call, along with AB 1234, a wage-claim enforcement bill aimed at reducing Labor Commissioner delays and adding consequences for employers who fail to participate in the process. The committee also heard AB 394, which expands protections for transit workers and allows transit agencies to seek restraining orders against violent riders; it received broad support, some concern about system-wide bans, and was discussed with amendments that preserved judicial discretion.

Transcript Highlights:

• , enhancing Florida law enforcement crime databases, law enforcement mental health and wellness, and
• , enhancing Florida law enforcement crime databases, law enforcement mental health and wellness, and
• Florida law provides that a person may not lawfully use force or violence to resist a law enforcement
• Florida law provides that a person may not lawfully use force or violence to resist a law enforcement
• Current law does not carry an enhanced penalty for manslaughter when it involves law enforcement.

Bills: S0054 , S0156 , S0296 , S0298

Committee: Senate Appropriations Committee on Criminal and Civil Justice

Keywords: cognitive function, psychotropic drugs, violent offenders, autopsy procedures, medical records, school safety, public records, open government, sunshine law, victims of dating violence, domestic violence, address confidentiality program, confidential address, voter registration, voting records, elections, supervisor of elections, Department of State, Attorney General, privacy

Summary: The committee first heard a presentation on the Governor’s fiscal year 2026-27 public safety budget, which totals about $8.2 billion within a $117.4 billion overall state budget. Caitlin Dawkins of the Governor’s Office of Policy and Budget outlined funding and reductions across the public safety silo, including the Department of Corrections, Juvenile Justice, FDLE, Legal Affairs, the courts, and related entities. Agency heads then presented their requests, with FDLE seeking funding for fentanyl enforcement, career offender registry staffing, alert system upgrades, alcohol testing equipment, officer mental health, criminal alien detection, and statutory staffing needs; DJJ requesting money for the Florida Scholars Academy, uniforms, residential contract rate increases, a new Broward detention center, and facility maintenance; and DOC requesting major funding for correctional officer pay increases, 500 additional FTE, facility construction and maintenance, communications and security technology, offender information system modernization, inmate health care, pharmaceuticals, and food service. Members discussed staffing shortages, prison conditions, immigration enforcement, public records burdens, mental health and substance use treatment, and the need for continued investment in corrections. A member of the public also testified about poor conditions in some prisons, including clothing, food, medical care, and maintenance issues. The committee then considered and passed CS/SB 156, the Jason Rayner Act, which would clarify that a person may not resist a law enforcement officer with violence when the officer is performing official duties and would increase penalties in cases involving violence against officers. The bill sponsor described the case of Officer Jason Rayner and said the measure was intended to prevent defendants from using claims about unlawful detention or arrest to justify violence. An amendment conforming the bill’s language was adopted, and the bill was reported favorably after support was noted from several law enforcement and municipal groups. Next, the committee passed CS/SB 54, which addresses use of substances affecting cognitive function. An amendment narrowed the medical-records language to records relevant to investigations of violent offenders and clarified privacy protections. The bill was then reported favorably. The committee also passed CS/SB 296, the Haven Act, which would direct a study of a secure web-based alert system for domestic violence victims so they can contact 911 without alerting an abuser, and would expand the Address Confidentiality Program to include dating violence victims. Testimony from survivors and advocates emphasized the danger victims face when trying to leave abusive situations. Finally, the committee passed CS/SB 298, the public-records companion bill, which extends confidentiality protections for participants in the Address Confidentiality Program to dating violence victims as well. All three bills were reported favorably, and the committee adjourned after no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• law thank you Mr chair thank you chair law thank you Mr chair thank you chair hinsman<00:47:15.079><c
• </c><00:49:11.559><c> I</c> business transactions from the law I business transactions from the law I
• a law and laws to ensure there will be a law and laws to protect<01:03:49.599><c> others</c><01:03:50.520
• In 2023, we passed the strongest law in the country, Amar's Law.
• existed in the law.

Committee: House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy

Keywords: 1183, house