Transcript Highlights:

• Castle Ring, yes. Rep. Weber, yes. Rep. McCay, yes. Rep. Woods, yes. Rep. Tea, yes. Rep.
• Castle Ring, yes. Rep. Weber, yes. Rep. McCay, yes. Rep. Woods, yes. Rep. Tea, yes. Rep.
• Castle Ring, yes. McGrath, yes. Rep. Castle Ring, yes.
• Castle<00:19:53.039><c> Ring,</c><00:19:53.440><c> yes.</c><00:19:54.400><c> Rep.
• </c> Castle Ring, yes. Rep. Weber, uh, no. Castle Ring, yes. Rep. Weber, uh, no.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The next threat comes from the application of an increasingly outdated legal doctrine called the third-party
• doctrine.
• That doctrine says that when a person voluntarily... ...doctrine called the third-party doctrine.
• That doctrine says that when a person voluntarily shares private information with a third party, they
• The solution is to pass a law updating the third-party doctrine for the 21st century so that living a

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: The committee held a series of informational briefings on information management and technology issues. It first heard from ACLU representatives on data privacy, who argued that Oregon should strengthen protections against private data brokers, government purchases of personal data, reverse warrants, automatic license plate readers, and local police surveillance. They urged data minimization, limits on data sales and retention, and broader transparency and accountability measures. Members asked about practical uses of license plate readers, state sales of data, and how Oregon’s approach compares with other states; the presenters said similar proposals have been adopted elsewhere, including data minimization in Maryland and a state version of the Fourth Amendment Is Not for Sale Act in Montana. The committee then received a detailed update from the Department of Administrative Services and Enterprise Information Services on licensing system modernization for 14 boards and commissions with the most immediate need. DAS said it is seeking a shared procurement approach through an RFP that would create either one scalable system or two tiers of systems, depending on agency needs and security requirements, with contracts expected by September. Committee members emphasized the need for a more unified, user-friendly statewide login and service experience for businesses and residents, and raised concerns about small agencies “figuring it out on their own” without sufficient cybersecurity or technical expertise. EIS said it is overseeing the investment review, security and architecture review, and future implementation planning, and noted that multiple agency requests may still come back to the legislature in the next session. The committee also discussed a revised cybersecurity incident notification concept. Staff explained that the earlier bill had raised stakeholder concerns, so the co-chairs directed further interim work with the Oregon Cybersecurity Advisory Council and other local government and K-12 stakeholders. The goal is a narrower, voluntary “911-style” notification process that would let public bodies alert peers and potentially receive assistance after cyber incidents; a temporary voluntary process is being tested now, with a work group developing language for possible 2027 consideration. Finally, the committee heard updates from the new state chief data officer on data governance, data sharing, geospatial work, and the state transparency website, followed by a briefing on data centers from NCSL and the Technology Association of Oregon. The data officer described efforts to expand data inventories, data governance plans, data literacy, and interagency sharing, along with statewide aerial imagery, geospatial standards, and the open data portal. The data center discussion focused on national and state trends, including rapid growth in data centers, rising electricity and water demand, and legislative responses such as new rate classes, reporting requirements, and cost-allocation rules to protect ratepayers. No votes were taken; the meeting was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• that there is no concern here where it comes to federal preemption or intergovernmental immunity doctrine
• . ...where it comes to federal preemption or intergovernmental immunity doctrine violations.
• There are limitations under federal preemption and intergovernmental immunity doctrines as to what state
• legislatures may and... ...immunity doctrines as to what state legislatures may and may not do.
• state or local government would be constitutionally suspect under the intergovernmental immunity doctrine

Bills: SB100

Keywords: burglary, aggravated burglary, dwelling, criminal law, property rights, 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Doctrine specifically says regardless if Doctrine specifically says regardless if it's<03:52:20.359><
• Yeah, that's the actual case, the Open Fields Doctrine case.
• </c><03:56:44.080><c> case</c> the Open Fields Doctrine case the Open Fields Doctrine case representative
• is a valid doctrine?
• Open Fields Doctrine is a valid Doctrine Open Fields Doctrine is a valid Doctrine I'm<04:26:39.319><c

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• limits courts to deciding the case or controversy before them, and courts are supposed to apply doctrines
• contractor in Toledo, Ohio, that was challenging OSHA's statute, which, under the non-delegation doctrine
• , which is a long-standing doctrine, and Supreme Court precedent that says that Congress can't delegate
• so in that case, we were challenging the statute on its face as a violation of the non-delegation doctrine

Keywords: John Eisenberg, assistant attorney general, national security, China Initiative, Department of Justice, judicial authority, executive actions, nomination hearing

Summary: The committee meeting primarily involved discussions around key nominations and pressing legal issues pertaining to the Department of Justice. Notable discussions included the nomination of John Eisenberg for assistant attorney general for national security, where concerns over the revival of the China Initiative were raised. Senators expressed significant apprehensions regarding previous actions taken under this initiative and its implications for national security. Additionally, there were critiques of the broader implications of executive actions that challenge judicial authority, aligning with ongoing dialogues about the integrity of the judiciary and executive oversight.

Transcript Highlights:

• Picture of Castle High School where they installed the PV panels under this big banyan tree.
• Picture of Castle High School where they installed the PV panels under this big banyan tree.
• Picture of Castle High School where they installed the PV panels under this big banyan tree.
• Picture of Castle High School where they installed the PV panels under this big banyan tree.
• Uh, with regards to the Castle &gt;&gt; Yeah.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I met earlier in the rotunda with student leaders, faculty, and family from Mokapu Elementary and Castle
• folks are here, please rise and let's give them a round of applause. >> [applause] Elementary and Castle
• High School on the Elementary and Castle High School on the Windward<00:22:31.160><c> side.

Bills: HB1576, HB2490, HB1546, HB1588

Keywords: HB1576, Hawaii film industry, DBEDT, BLNR, Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism, Board of Land and Natural Resources, film permits, motion picture production, television production, commercial filming, digital media tax credit, film production tax credit, public notice, transparency, state lands, film studio, land set-aside, revocable permit, memorandum of agreement, memorandum of understanding

Transcript Highlights:

• 43.360><c> from</c> also on Highway 25 in Ranken County from also on Highway 25 in Ranken County from Castle
• 03:46.480><c> 471</c><00:03:47.440><c> I</c><00:03:47.680><c> believe</c><00:03:47.840><c> it</c> Castle
• Woods to Highway 471 I believe it Castle Woods to Highway 471 I believe it is.<00:03:49.040><c> And<

Keywords: Appropriations - Room 216, 2 February, 2026; 1:30 PM, 925, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The plan here is to have a great celebration at the monument and then move down to Castle Island or Fort
• The plan here is to have a great celebration at the monument and then move down to Castle Island or Fort

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The State Commission on the 250th Anniversary of the American Revolution DEIA Subcommittee met to share updates on 250th-related projects and to discuss how to ensure the commemoration is inclusive, statewide, and reflective of Black, Indigenous, and other underrepresented histories. Members described ongoing research and programming, including work in Quincy, Lexington, Bridgewater/Brockton, Mashpee, and other communities to identify Black revolutionary soldiers, Indigenous connections, and lesser-known local stories. Several members emphasized that the 250th should be framed as both commemoration and celebration, with attention to difficult histories as well as resilience, joy, and cultural contributions. Dr. Noel Trent reported on the Museum of African American History’s exhibition Black Voices of the Revolution, funded by Mass 250, which opened June 30 and will run through 2026 or into 2027. He described the exhibit’s use of AI tools, archaeological finds from Nantucket and Boston, and related programming. Other members highlighted Mass Humanities’ Expand Massachusetts Stories funding round, including support for the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe and likely additional Indigenous-led projects, as well as a statewide equity playbook being drafted for Mass 250 fundraising and engagement. Sheila Green of Massachusetts 250 then presented an overview of the statewide campaign, including advertising, social media, a website with events and blogs, 96 grants totaling $3 million, partnerships with sports teams and cultural organizations, and major upcoming events such as Evacuation Day, the Henry Knox reenactment, Sail Boston 250, and World Cup-related activity. During discussion, members suggested practical ways to improve inclusion and outreach, including sharing stories through blogs, podcasts, and a centralized project tracker, and highlighting museums and community programs that offer joy, rest, and cultural activities alongside historical interpretation. Dr. Trent raised concern that some Massachusetts 250 merchandise, such as T-shirts, did not adequately reflect the diversity of the state, and Green said the team was considering a redesign. The subcommittee agreed to compile a summary of stories, names, and examples for the full commission, and to continue sharing photos and materials by email for possible presentation at a future commission meeting. The meeting ended with a motion to adjourn, which was approved unanimously.

Transcript Highlights:

• Sorry, the Chair now calls Mary Elizabeth Castle. Thank you for being here today.
• Good morning, my name is Mary Elizabeth Castle.

Bills: HB370, HB738, HB2935, HB3227, HB4103, HB5259, SB519, SB1350, SB1247, SB1248, SB2112, HCR81, HCR83, HCR84, HCR59, HCR109, HCR111, HCR135, SCR6

Keywords: HB 370, Events Trust Fund, Texas events funding, sports eligibility, women's sports, girls' sports, biological sex, transgender athletes, sex-segregated sports, athletic competition, event subsidies, tourism funding, site selection organization, anti-trafficking plan, female athletes, public funding, economic impact, sports policy, Rosenwald Schools, historical preservation

Transcript Highlights:

• from his frivolous lawsuits and his treasonous rhetoric, to resist President Trump's America First Doctrine
• > resist president Trump's um America resist president Trump's um America First<00:24:10.840><c> Doctrine
• ><c> that</c><00:24:12.080><c> the</c><00:24:12.159><c> voters</c><00:24:12.480><c> of</c> First Doctrine
• uh that the voters of First Doctrine uh that the voters of this<00:24:12.799><c> nation</c><00:24:13.080
• </c><00:24:27.559><c> specifically</c> the America First Doctrine specifically the America First Doctrine

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• From what I've studied, are there legal doctrines that have barred outside funding for lawsuits?
• Is there a lax on those legal doctrines? Or how do we get to this point?
• So is there legal doctrine out there to kind of prevent this, or are they being ignored, or how did we

Summary: The Committee on Legislative Review met in executive session and voted House Bill 2408 due pass by an 8-0 roll call. It then considered House Bill 3092, where a House Committee amendment was adopted and rolled into a House Committee substitute despite objections that the amendment had not received a public hearing and would repeal significant insurance-related provisions. The substitute for HB 3092 was then approved 6-3. The committee also adopted an amendment and House Committee substitute for House Bill 3004, which passed unanimously 9-0. In open hearing, Representative Hausman presented House Bill 3090 as a transparency measure requiring the state treasurer to report annually on special treasury funds that have had no spending for five years and whether those funds were moved to general revenue. She said the bill would help lawmakers identify inactive accounts and unused money. Members asked how the reporting would work, what funds might be affected, and whether the bill would move unused balances into GR after five years; the sponsor said it would. No witnesses testified for or against, and the hearing closed. The committee then heard House Bill 3205 from Representative Castile, which would regulate third-party litigation funding, require disclosure of outside and foreign-linked funders, restrict funding from foreign adversaries, and give enforcement authority to the Attorney General. Members questioned the bill’s scope, including whether the foreign-terrorist language could be read too broadly and how liability and funding-risk provisions would work. Testimony in support came from Associated Industries of Missouri, the Missouri Insurance Coalition/Missouri Civil Justice Coalition, and medical associations, all arguing that litigation funding can distort lawsuits, hide outside influence, and expose businesses and plaintiffs to abusive or foreign-backed financing. No opposition testimony was offered, and the hearing concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• HR 6, House Resolution condemning the judicial doctrine of disparate impact, and the chair recognizes
• of uh Des dispert judicial doctrine of uh Des dispert impact<00:15:12.519><c> and</c><00:15:12.639><
• The doctrine of disparate impact is a judicial doctrine, and I don't think that the legislature can bind
• HR for several reasons the doctrine of HR for several reasons the doctrine of uh<00:15:54.240><c> disparate
• and and I don't think that the Doctrine and and I don't think that the legislature<00:16:01.440><c>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee met in executive session and first corrected a procedural issue by revoting on House Bills 98 and 164, which had previously been reported out unanimously before the notice had been placed on the calendar. HB 98, concerning professional limited liability company assistant managers, was again voted ought to pass by roll call 16-0 and was placed on the consent calendar. HB 164, dealing with local records, was amended with a fiscal note update from the Secretary of State’s office and then voted ought to pass as amended 17-0; because it was going to Finance, it was not eligible for consent. The committee also set aside HB 111 briefly while the amendment language was corrected. The committee then took up HR 6, a resolution condemning the judicial doctrine of disparate impact. The sponsor argued the resolution was intended to criticize the doctrine, but several members said it was too broad, legally problematic, and in need of more work, including a drafting error in the addressee. The committee voted ITL on HR 6 by 15-2, and with no objection it was placed on the consent calendar. The final major item was HB 111 FN, which would extend the right-to-know ombudsman position for two years. Representative Kuttab offered an amendment to limit remote records requests to people with a New Hampshire connection, citing testimony about out-of-state requests and the burden on municipalities. Members discussed the broader policy of the bill, with supporters saying the ombudsman has reduced court filings and saves time and money, while opponents said the office needs restructuring or more resources and that they were not ready to extend it without changes. The amendment was adopted 16-1, and the committee then voted ought to pass as amended 15-2, sending the bill to Finance.

Transcript Highlights:

• Imagine what that is for the... from Castle Rock and and the uh senator from Castle Rock and and the
• I don't know if you all have driven down I-25 recently, but Parker and Castle Rock have grown immensely
• I don't know if you all have driven down I-25 recently, but Parker and Castle Rock have grown immensely
• I don't know if you all have driven down I-25 recently, but Parker and Castle Rock have grown immensely
• I don't know if you all have driven down I-25 recently, but Parker and Castle Rock have grown immensely

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This is a little bit different spin on the anti-delegation doctrine.
• Spin on the anti-delegation doctrine.
• Chair, Representative, the challenge is that the constitutional doctrine evolves through court decisions
• The challenge is that the constitutional doctrine evolves through court decisions, such as the Sullivan

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several Senate bills and one House bill. SB 1039 would allow attorneys prevailing in disciplinary matters to recover lost earnings and seek reputational harm damages from the State Bar; SB 1148 would require the Arizona Supreme Court to directly license attorneys rather than delegate that function; both received due pass recommendations. SB 1061, lowering the fentanyl enhanced-penalty threshold from 200 grams to 9 grams, also passed after opposition from the ACLU and defense counsel argued it would sweep in personal-use cases and increase incarceration, while supporters said it targets trafficking. SB 1068, which limits campus firearm restrictions for concealed-carry permit holders, passed over strong opposition from gun-safety advocates and university faculty, and SB 1069, removing suppressors from the definition of prohibited weapons, also passed despite concerns about public safety and prohibited possessors. The committee then approved SB 1099, which sets statutory elements for defamation claims based on whether the plaintiff is a private or public figure and whether the matter is of public or private concern. The ACLU opposed it, warning that codifying defamation law could chill speech and conflict with evolving First Amendment precedent; supporters said it largely codifies existing case law and adds an internet-related limitation period. SB 1271, barring municipalities from penalizing businesses for legitimate emergency calls unless there is a pattern of false or frivolous reports, passed unanimously after testimony that some cities were discouraging 911 calls for theft and other incidents. The committee also passed SB 1127, requiring mandatory reporters with direct knowledge of child abuse or neglect to report immediately and personally to DCS. Phoenix Children’s Hospital and DCS supported the bill but asked for clarification so medical emergencies would not be disrupted, and members discussed possible amendments. SB 1426, changing forcible detainer procedures by removing the written demand-to-vacate requirement and expediting claims, passed despite landlord-group concerns that it could affect holdover tenant cases. Finally, SB 1448, as amended, passed to expand aggravated assault protections to utility, telecommunications, video service, and related workers; supporters cited rising threats and assaults, while opponents argued existing assault laws already cover the conduct and the bill is overly broad.

Transcript Highlights:

• I’ll focus on two areas of concern with this doctrine: error and proportionality.
• First, the joint venture doctrine leaves convictions susceptible to bias and error.
• First, the joint venture doctrine leaves convictions susceptible to bias and error.
• Ironically, I'm a victim of joint venture doctrine as well.
• Many of them never actually committed a murder as a result of joint venture doctrine.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing opened with procedural remarks and acknowledgments of Rosh Hashanah, followed by testimony on several criminal justice bills before the Joint Committee on the Judiciary. A major focus was S. 1061, the “Raise the Age” bill, which would gradually move 18- to 20-year-olds into the juvenile justice system. Supporters included youth and young adult advocates, former juvenile court Judge Jay Blitzman, ACLU and CPCS representatives, Roca, United Way, Citizens for Juvenile Justice, and Senator Brendan Crichton. They argued that young adults are still developmentally immature, that juvenile court services improve education and rehabilitation, and that adult-system involvement leads to higher recidivism and racial disparities. Committee members asked practical questions about how the bill would work, and witnesses explained that it would expand access to juvenile court diversion, probation, and DYS services for the covered age group. The chairs also noted a notice issue, clarifying that the hearing had been posted seven days in advance rather than the usual ten. The committee also heard testimony on a bill to revise accomplice and joint venture murder liability and sentencing. Representative Sam Montaño and Senator Liz Miranda supported the reform, arguing that current law can impose life sentences on people with limited or no knowledge of a killing and that the doctrine contributes to racial bias and disproportionate punishment. A law professor, a former defendant, and advocates from the National Council for Incarcerated and Formerly Incarcerated Women and Girls described cases where people were punished far beyond their actual role and said the bill would better align charges and sentences with individual culpability. Related testimony also supported a proportionality-focused reform to reduce the harshness of joint venture sentencing. Several other public safety and criminal justice bills drew testimony. Senator Robin Kennedy supported a bill redefining strangulation in domestic violence law, saying the current “substantial pressure” standard is too vague and that strangulation is often lethal without visible injury. District Attorney Ryan and a retail business executive backed a bill on organized retail theft, saying it would give prosecutors more flexible charging options and better address coordinated theft rings. Representative Vieira and the family of Kiana Barros urged action on Kiana’s Law, which would improve restraining-order notification and enforcement after Barros’s daughter was killed after an order was not served. The hearing also included support for the HALO Act, which would create a 25-foot safety zone around first responders and penalize harassment or obstruction, and for a bill to enhance courthouse security by creating specific protections for judges and their families. No votes were taken during the hearing."} 0}]}

Transcript Highlights:

• Now the legislature again invokes the separation of powers doctrine as a shield against the will of the
• The separation of powers doctrine locks hand in hand with the doctrine of checks and balances, a cornerstone
• The separation of powers doctrine locks hand in hand with the doctrine of checks and balances, a cornerstone
• So, separation of powers doctrine in this context is concerned with this operative question: Will an
• The separation of powers doctrine is one of the major tenets of American democracy.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on whether the Office of the State Auditor may constitutionally audit the Massachusetts Legislature under Chapter 250 of the Acts of 2024 and what such an audit could include under generally accepted government auditing standards. Chair Cindy Friedman opened by explaining the background: voters approved Ballot Question 1 in November 2024, the law took effect in January 2025, and the Auditor then initiated audits of both chambers. The chair said the subcommittee was seeking expert testimony because the proposed audit scope, constitutionality, and possible bias concerns remained unresolved. Public testimony was invited, but no members of the public pre-registered; written testimony remained open for a short period after the hearing. The hearing then proceeded with invited experts on constitutional law/state government and auditing-related issues. Professor Lawrence Friedman testified that the ballot initiative’s approval by the Attorney General and by voters did not resolve constitutional questions, and he argued Chapter 250 violates the Massachusetts Constitution. He said the Legislature has constitutional authority to set its own rules and manage its proceedings, and that an executive-branch audit would intrude on legislative deliberation, speech and debate protections, and separation of powers. He also warned that even audits of supposedly administrative matters could become a vehicle for repeated document demands and litigation that would indirectly burden legislative functioning. In questioning, senators pressed him on the line between administrative and deliberative functions, the role of the Attorney General versus the courts, the possibility of retroactive audit scope, and whether prior legislative consent to audits mattered; he said prior consent would not bind future legislatures and that constitutionality is ultimately for the courts. Professor Ray La Raja also opposed the audit, framing it as a threat to institutional independence and representative democracy. He argued that allowing an executive-branch official to audit the Legislature without consent would upset separation of powers, chill internal debate, and create a precedent for broader executive intrusion. He said voters often support “transparency” reforms without fully appreciating institutional consequences, and that legislatures should defend their autonomy, especially amid what he described as broader executive overreach nationally. Senators asked about chilling effects, the practical distinction between administrative and core legislative functions, and whether the courts or the Legislature should resolve the issue; he said the courts would ultimately adjudicate disputes, but the Legislature should not waive its constitutional authority lightly. Jean Kempthorne took the opposite view, arguing the audit is permissible and should proceed. She said the state auditor is a constitutional officer accountable directly to the people, that the audit power can be expanded by statute, and that separation of powers does not require watertight compartments. She contended the audit would not displace core legislative powers because the auditor can only evaluate operations, report findings, and make recommendations. She also argued the Legislature itself already conducts audits of other branches, so it is inconsistent to claim an audit of the Legislature is unconstitutional. In response to senators’ questions, she said there are guardrails against truly intrusive requests, but that the administrative-versus-legislative distinction is not a workable bright line; she suggested disputes should be handled case by case, with objections, negotiation, or litigation if specific requests go too far. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• That move is legally possible because of what is known as the third-party doctrine.
• So under current Fourth Amendment doctrine, information you voluntarily share with a third party—your
• So the broader third-party doctrine remains in place, even after Carpenter, meaning most information
• So the broader third-party doctrine remains in place, even after Carpenter, meaning most information
• So under California jurisprudence, the third-party doctrine does not exist here.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The Chair calls David Dunmoyer and Mary Elizabeth Castle. What are we doing, guys? How are you?
• My name is Mary Elizabeth Castle. I'm the Director of Government Relations for Texas Values.
• Continuing public testimony, the Chair calls Mary Elizabeth Castle, Jordan Ozen, and Carmen Beaufil Simon-Cox
• My name is Mary Elizabeth Castle.

Bills: HB186, HB201, HB229, HB796, HB1506, HB2702, HB2885, HB3225, HB3909, HB4285, HB5138

Keywords: social media, children, account verification, data privacy, parental control, financial crime, card fraud, motor fuel theft, law enforcement, criminal activity, skimmers, prevention, training, biological sex, government information, definitions, sex-based distinctions, public health, federal directives, state authority

Transcript Highlights:

• much-needed and long-overdue CON reform, the addition of the 11th hour amendment that violates the doctrine
• the 11th hour amendment that violates the 11th hour amendment that violates the<00:13:59.960><c> doctrine
• separation</c><00:14:01.000><c> of</c><00:14:01.120><c> powers</c><00:14:02.040><c> and</c> the doctrine
• of separation of powers and the doctrine of separation of powers and is<00:14:02.280><c> bad</c><00:

Keywords: MS House Floor - 6 January, 2026; 12:00 PM, 925, all