Transcript Highlights:

• So when you have the presumption here of... ...child support.
• I got the presumption of 50-50 custody. I got the presumption of 50-50 custody.
• It's not a presumption. And that, I can tell you, that is such a big problem.
• and use the presumption as leverage against a spouse.
• And use the presumption as leverage against a spouse.

Keywords: 974, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It does so by creating a rebuttable presumption that a heat-related injury arose out of the course of
• And that's important because the legislature passed legislation that essentially says if a presumption
• It almost makes it unnecessary to have a presumption because it says a presumption applies if the heat
• That proves the existence of a valid workers' compensation claim, and no presumption is necessary.
• And what this bill does is sort of automate the process by creating this presumption.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Insurance met as a subcommittee and heard several bills related to workers’ compensation, insurance access, climate resilience, and farmworker protections. AB 815 would prevent social service workers who use personal vehicles to transport clients from being misclassified as commercial or for-hire drivers under personal auto policies; supporters said the current practice leads to unaffordable premiums and denied claims, while no opposition testified. AB 1329 would revise the Subsequent Injury Benefit Trust Fund to reduce litigation and medical-legal costs and lower employer assessments; insurers and business groups opposed unless amended, citing concerns about eligibility standards and the QME process, but the bill advanced after amendments were discussed. AB 1048 would allow disputed unauthorized payment reductions for medical providers to be reviewed through independent bill review; supporters framed it as a transparency measure, while opposition argued IBR is the wrong forum and existing contract dispute processes should control, though the bill also passed. AB 1236 would create a Department of Insurance grant program for climate and sustainability risk-reduction projects, with broad support from the department, environmental groups, and insurers, and it passed unanimously. The committee also heard AB 1336, the Farmworker Heat Illness Prevention Act, which would create a rebuttable presumption that a heat-related injury arose out of employment when an agricultural employer fails to comply with heat illness prevention standards. Supporters, including United Farm Workers, argued the bill would help protect farmworkers amid extreme heat and enforcement gaps; opponents from the workers’ compensation and agricultural sectors said the measure improperly uses the compensation system to enforce OSHA rules and could create unclear adjudication and delay issues. Members discussed Cal/OSHA enforcement limits, undocumented workers’ reluctance to report violations, and the relationship between the bill and existing workers’ compensation procedures. Despite opposition, AB 1336 passed on a divided vote. The committee also took up a consent calendar including AB 1125, AB 1293, and AB 1398, which were approved together. Roll calls were held open and later completed, and the bills that advanced were sent to the Committee on Appropriations. The meeting concluded with the committee adjourning after final votes were recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• Current statute does not expressly articulate this presumption in suits involving a parent and a non-parent
• Senate Bill 2052 clarifies this ambiguity by establishing a rebuttable presumption that a parent acts
• The bill also, though, recognizes that this is a presumption.
• And so in overcoming that presumption, though, you have to set a standard.
• And the standard set by this bill is clear and convincing evidence to overcome this presumption that

Bills: SB387, SB1650, SB1838, SB1839, SB1923, SB1940, SB2052

Keywords: judicial bond, guardianship, probate law, county judge, statutory county court, attorney general, criminal prosecution, public order, law enforcement, jurisdiction, attorney ad litem, parent-child relationship, compensation, legal representation, government entity, probate, court proceedings, record delivery, wills, legal documentation

Summary: The Senate Committee on Jurisprudence heard several family-law and probate bills. Senate Bill 2052 would codify a rebuttable presumption that a parent acts in the best interest of a child and require clear and convincing evidence to overcome that presumption in disputes involving non-parents; the author and several witnesses supported the bill as a clarification of existing case law, while one witness suggested refining the modification language. Public testimony was closed and the bill was left pending. The committee also heard Senate Bill 1923, which would allow child support to follow a child placed temporarily with kin or fictive kin under a parental child safety placement or authorization agreement; the bill’s author and a grandparent caregiver testified in support, while one witness suggested the Attorney General could handle the change administratively. That bill was also left pending. Senate Bill 1838 would standardize fee schedules and compensation rules for attorneys ad litem and related court-appointed counsel in DFPS child-protection cases. The author said the bill would clarify unclear current law, and witnesses from the Texas Indigent Defense Commission and family-defense bar supported it, though one asked that expert-witness expenses be expressly included. Senate Bill 387 would raise the bond requirement for county judges handling guardianship proceedings to at least $500,000; the author described it as a refiling of a prior bill that passed unanimously but was vetoed, and a statutory probate judge testified in support. Senate Bill 1839 would require original or paper wills to be delivered to the transferee court when probate proceedings are transferred; the committee substitute broadened the delivery methods, and the district clerk witness supported the change. All three bills were left pending. The committee also took up Senate Bill 1536, which had previously been voted out with the wrong committee substitute; members reconsidered the vote, adopted the corrected substitute, and then voted 3-0 to report the bill favorably to the full Senate, with local and contested calendar certification. Finally, Senate Bill 1940 would create a transfer-on-death mechanism for manufactured homes classified as personal property, similar to existing tools for real property and vehicles; the author and an estate-planning attorney testified that it would streamline transfers and reduce probate costs. A non-substantive committee substitute was still being prepared, and the bill was left pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• This old presumption language and that moniker resulted in many disputes with firefighters who were coming
• Besides bringing this language back and the uncertainty of which cancers are covered under the presumption
• Delegating the decision of what cancers are covered under the presumption statute to the International
• Using the IARC in the statute creates a situation where we have to prove that a presumption exists.
• we lost in my town died from esophageal cancer, and esophageal cancer is not covered under the presumptive

Bills: HB1654, HB1691, HB2545, HB2652, HB3799, HB4144, HB5008

Keywords: peace officers, firefighters, employment protection, worker's compensation, job security, maximum medical improvement, government employment, firefighter cancer benefits, emergency medical technicians, compensation claims, cancer exposures, firefighting hazards, workforce training, rural development, grant program, job-specific training, Texas Workforce Commission, child care, single-parent, subsidized

Transcript Highlights:

• I shared... ...would be a presumption, which we're not dealing with.
• the law... ...of a presumption that equal time should be written into the law.
• So I do believe we have a presumption; it's not called a presumption, but that's the starting point,
• And having a presumption, the only presumption that exists in the law for custody disputes right now
• is a domestic violence presumption: that if you physically harm somebody, there's a presumption you should

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:

• So what is presumptive eligibility? It is a process that we already have.
• So what is presumptive eligibility? It is a process that we already have.
• So what is presumptive eligibility? It is a process that we already have.
• So what is presumptive eligibility? It is a process that we already have.
• </c> intervention this presumptive intervention this presumptive eligibility<00:27:18.279><c> will</c

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But this still wouldn't try, and I think the presumption is still that if you're ...
• If you're married, a child born of marriage is presumed to be yours; it's a rebuttable presumption.
• This requires... that the parental presumption has to be overcome because it was done by agreement.
• And the state of the law on this is nobody disputes that the parental presumption exists.
• And that presumption goes away when there's a finding of family violence. So just as Mr....

Bills: HCR 16, HB 782, HB 2159, HB 2288, HB 3281, HB 3819, HB 4656, HB 4696, HB 5494

Keywords: fatherhood, family support, fatherlessness, community engagement, youth development, social policy, male role models, child development, policy reform, role models, mental health, parenting, single-parent homes, welfare reform, economic opportunity, mentorship, community initiatives, children, welfare programs, education

Transcript Highlights:

• The second issue is the presumption. Obviously, the presumption has come out of the bill now.
• Presumptions are tricky. They're not perfect. I totally get both sides of the argument.
• But I'm obviously concerned that without a presumption, you're just going to subject individuals and
• To answer the question, the goal, regardless of whether the presumption is there, is no longer there,
• And so, even though there isn't a presumption currently in the bill, if CalEPA comes up with specific

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This is the Medicaid providing presumptive eligibility for...
• Presumptive eligibility for pregnant women.
• This would establish presumptive eligibility to determine the coverage for a pregnant woman, provided
• This will just give presumptive eligibility, and if you're pregnant, you're going to qualify for Medicaid
• So it's... presumptive eligibility is going to turn into being eligible and being awarded Medicaid, and

Bills: SB58, SB101, SB102

Keywords: parental rights, minor consent, medical consent, mental health services, school counseling, student counseling, parental notification, opt-in, health records, HIPAA, vaccine consent, adolescent health, youth privacy, confidential counseling, school mental health, reproductive health, pregnancy services, sexually transmitted infections, STI treatment, substance abuse treatment

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2023, the legislature passed HB 1301, which created a Judge Happily: Rebuttable presumption that equal
• Again, here in Florida our presumption is for shared parental responsibility, meaning that the parents
• Oftentimes one of the ways the parties try to rebut that presumption.
• Here was the wife trying to rebut the fifty-fifty presumption by hiring the Guardian ad litem to do that
• There's a lot of other ways in the statute that allow for parties to rebut that presumption.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, as you look in here, you're essentially getting a presumptive fleeing charge.
• Your insurance wouldn't skyrocket with a presumptive fleeing or whatever the proper terminology they'll
• Your insurance wouldn't skyrocket with a presumptive fleeing or whatever the proper terminology they'll
• So that's the presumption unless, you know, we're a trust but verify area here, and there was no verify
• And our committee didn't like the presumption at all.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The conference committee on House Bill 1229 met to try to resolve differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill, which deals with reporting certain traffic offenses to driving records and, by extension, insurance companies. House members argued that the House position was driven by concern that reporting lower-level offenses would unfairly raise insurance costs, while Senate members said they opposed removing reporting because they wanted transparency and believed people who break the law should face consequences. The discussion focused heavily on whether the bill should continue to exclude offenses at two points and below from reporting, or whether a narrower compromise such as one point and below might be acceptable. Committee members and DOT Driver and Vehicle Director Brad Schaefer reviewed a color-coded list of offenses and how they are currently reported. Schaefer explained that salmon-shaded items automatically appear on driving records because they trigger suspension or revocation, green items are commercial-driver violations that also trigger suspension, and the remaining unshaded zero-, one-, and some two-point violations were the main subject of the conference discussion. Members debated whether some low-point items, such as equipment violations, no child restraint, distracted driving, and failure to use due care, should remain reportable, while acknowledging that serious offenses like fleeing and human trafficking would remain reportable regardless. No final compromise was reached. Several members expressed interest in a possible middle ground limited to one-point-and-below offenses, but others worried the Senate would not accept it. The committee agreed to adjourn and reschedule after members had more time to review the list and consider possible amendments.

Transcript Highlights:

• Presumption still is that it's shared equally, correct? That is correct.
• So when you have the presumption here of... ...child support.
• , I got the presumption of 50-50 custody.”
• It's not a presumption. And that, I can tell you, that is such a big problem.
• and use the presumption as leverage against a spouse.

Summary: The Senate Judiciary A Committee met on May 5, 2026, with five members present and adopted the April 28 minutes. The committee then heard and favorably reported several measures, including HCR 31, which asks the Louisiana Law Institute to study replacing or clarifying the term “foreign” in state law; HB 263, allowing the 14th JDC magistrate judge to handle certain specialty court felony matters; HB 299, clarifying paper filing rules for jury bonds and related payment issues; HB 535, simplifying hospital-based acknowledgments of paternity by removing the two-witness requirement while keeping notarization; HB 571, codifying the 19th JDC’s complex litigation section program; and HB 538, increasing the East Baton Rouge Parish Juvenile Court fee cap from $15 to $75 to help offset court costs. The committee also reported HB 215, raising the small succession affidavit threshold from $125,000 to $200,000, and HB 226, adding a 10.1 conference requirement before requests for admissions are deemed admitted, with discussion about discovery fairness and default judgment exceptions. The committee also took up HB 324, which makes judicial stipend increases permanent and adds a 2.7% salary increase for judges effective July 1, 2027; an amendment restoring the second year of the COLA was adopted, and the bill was reported with amendments. HB 1043, raising the jurisdictional amount in Jefferson Parish first and second parish courts, was amended to increase the amount from $35,000 to $50,000 and then reported with amendments. HCR 6, directing the Law Institute to study forced heirship and disinherison issues, was amended to add reporting language and related Civil Code references and then reported with amendments. HB 1006, changing summary judgment deadlines to give opponents more time to respond, was amended and reported by a 3-2 vote after roll call. Two more substantive bills drew extended debate. HB 1239 would strengthen the presumption that parents share physical custody equally unless a court finds that arrangement infeasible or not in the child’s best interest; supporters framed it as a parental-rights measure, while an attorney in opposition warned it would increase litigation, reduce stability for children, and be used as leverage in child support disputes. Despite the opposition, the committee reported the bill favorably. HB 190, as amended, would create a duty of reasonable care for certain software/app providers toward minors and require expert testimony, while excluding manufacturers; supporters said it was aimed at protecting children from harmful platform design, but opponents argued the proposal was unnecessary because existing tort law already covers negligence and warned it could create new causes of action and uncertainty over whether software is a “product.” The committee heard testimony from the Louisiana State Law Institute, the sponsor, and outside witnesses, but the transcript ends before final action on HB 190 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill seeks to reduce the timeline for presumption of paternity from 300 days to 90 days.
• This bill seeks to reduce the timeline for presumption of paternity from 300 days to 90 days.
• Like Representative Chasson said, it just changes the presumption of paternity from 90 to 150 days.
• And this is one of the strongest presumptions we have in family law... ...those avenues.
• This is probably one of the strongest presumptions that we've had, especially in family law.

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 718, which would limit liability for landowners who allow free use of private property for aeronautical activities at non-public airports. The author said the bill was modeled on Arkansas law and was intended to help private airstrips. After brief questions about fees and the effective date, the bill was reported favorably without objection. House Bill 134, dealing with material harmful to minors online, was then amended to clarify that interactive computer services may not deliver harmful material to minor accounts they created, while removing algorithm restrictions and cure language; it was reported as amended. House Bill 410, which would require notification before recording direct in-person conversations, drew substantial testimony. The author said the bill was aimed at privacy concerns raised by wearable AI devices and hidden recording tools, and the adopted amendments changed the measure from consent to notification and added exceptions for first responders, evidence preservation, civil or administrative proceedings, criminal matters, and recordings in one’s own residence. Supporters said the bill protected ordinary people from secret recordings, while opponents warned it could chill family-law recordings, citizen journalism, HOA disputes, and other legitimate uses. The bill was ultimately reported as amended. House Bill 318, which would reduce the presumption of paternity period from 300 days to 150 days, was heavily criticized by family-law practitioners and a law professor who said the current 300-day rule tracks gestation and that shortening it would shift burdens onto mothers; the author then voluntarily deferred the bill. A companion study resolution, HCR 19, directing the Louisiana State Law Institute to study the presumption of parentage, was reported favorably. The committee also heard House Bill 970 on competing custody orders. The author described cases where different courts issued conflicting custody rulings for the same child, but judges and attorneys raised concerns about the bill’s “earliest order controls” rule, its effect on out-of-state orders, protective orders, and the lack of a clear mechanism for judges to discover prior orders. After testimony from judges and committee discussion about possible fixes and a unified filing system, the bill was voluntarily deferred. House Bill 163, another private-airstrip liability bill, was reported favorably, and House Bill 170 and House Bill 194, both dealing with construction/design professional contracts and preemptive periods, were reported as amended or favorably after testimony that they would align design-professional rules with contractor rules and keep Louisiana projects under Louisiana law. House Bill 254, limiting acts of donation of motor vehicles to certain relatives and charities, was reported as amended after discussion about tax treatment and possible loopholes. Finally, the committee began House Bill 485, a proposed constitutional amendment declaring parental rights fundamental and subjecting government restrictions to strict scrutiny. Supporters argued it would protect parents’ authority over children’s upbringing, education, care, and control, while opponents said the language was overly broad and could complicate child welfare, public health, and school safety measures. The author said the amendment would not protect abuse or neglect and was meant to ensure government interference meets strict scrutiny, but the transcript cuts off before final action on the measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• And really, where we're headed is that there's a rebuttable presumption.
• That's really all that it is doing in the sense of simply establishing a rebuttable presumption.
• It only changes it to... ...the point where there's a rebuttable presumption.
• </c> To bring this rebuttable presumption.
• >> Would a parent have to prove abuse more strongly to overcome this presumption?

Keywords: MS Senate Floor - 1 April, 2026; 10:00 AM, 925, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, but this still wouldn't try and I think the presumption is still that if you're...
• If you're married, a child born of marriage is presumed... it's a rebuttable presumption.
• If you are married to a woman and she has a child, the presumption is that that is your child.
• In some jurisdictions, they lose the parental presumption because some...
• And that presumption goes away when there's a finding of family violence. So just as Mr.

Bills: HCR16, HB782, HB2159, HB2288, HB3281, HB3819, HB4656, HB4696, HB5494, HCR16

Keywords: fatherhood, family support, fatherlessness, community engagement, youth development, social policy, male role models, child development, policy reform, role models, mental health, parenting, single-parent homes, welfare reform, economic opportunity, mentorship, community initiatives, children, welfare programs, education

Transcript Highlights:

• The second issue is just the presumption.
• So obviously the presumption has come out of the bill now. Presumptions are tricky.
• But I'm obviously concerned that without a presumption, you're just going to subject individuals and
• To answer the question, the goal, regardless of whether the presumption is there, is no longer there,
• And so, even though there isn't a presumption currently in the... ...is in the bill.

Summary: The Assembly Insurance Committee met as a subcommittee at first because a quorum was not initially present, then later established a quorum and heard several bills. The main special-order item was AB 1795 (Gibson), which would create statewide standards for testing, inspection, and remediation of wildfire smoke damage in homes, with CalEPA and public health agencies developing science-based standards and insurers required to follow new claims-handling timelines. Supporters, including Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara and wildfire survivors, said the bill would bring consistency and safety; insurers and consumer groups generally supported the concept but sought further amendments on scope, standards, and claim handling. The committee voted do pass as amended and refer AB 1795 to Appropriations, with the roll held open for later additions. The committee also considered AB 1576 (Ortega) on the Subsequent Injury Benefit Trust Fund, which would make changes intended to reduce litigation and employer assessments while preserving the program’s purpose of encouraging hiring of workers with prior disabilities. Labor-side witnesses supported the bill as a reform step, while business, public entity, and insurance groups opposed it, arguing it did not address the core structural problems and that a trailer bill was a better vehicle for broader reform. AB 1576 was voted do pass to Appropriations, with the roll held open. AB 1931 (Papan) would create an optional limited-lines license for utilities to offer home protection products for repairs to appliances and utility service lines. Support came from HomeServe, utilities, and industry groups, who said the bill would clarify current law and add consumer protections such as training, disclosures, and a free-look period; there was no opposition in the room. The committee passed AB 1931 to Appropriations. AB 2361 (Pacheco) would limit vicarious liability for peer-to-peer vehicle-sharing platforms like Turo while preserving insurance coverage requirements; supporters said it would align California with other states, while consumer attorneys opposed it as reducing accountability and consumer recovery. The committee passed AB 2361 as amended to Appropriations. AB 2098 (Kalra), heard later, would require employers to allow leave for workers to attend treatment for occupational injuries during work hours, subject to notice and business-necessity limits; labor groups supported it and business and insurance groups sought narrower standards. It was also voted do pass to Appropriations. The committee then completed roll-call add-ons and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• What happened to the presumption of innocence that our justice system is built on?
• However, it is the norm. 70% of our jail population is presumptively innocent, awaiting trial.
• Uh, one, it, it allows detention of presumptively innocent people who do not have a lawyer to advocate
• offense that even indirectly affects community safety, that's too low a bar to hold somebody who's presumptively
• take Texas down the wrong path by undermining Texas' fundamental right in pretrial liberty and the presumption

Bills: SB 9, SB 1047, SB 1048, SJR 17, SJR 49, SB 40, SJR 1, SJR 5

Keywords: bail reform, defendants, pretrial detention, public safety, criminal justice, charitable bail organizations, criminal procedure, public safety report, victim notification, family violence, bail bonds, public funds, political subdivision, injunction, taxpayer rights, violent crimes, sexual offenses, community safety, constitutional amendment, trafficking

Transcript Highlights:

• The budget also includes $15.5 million one-time for CalRx to support low-cost epinephrine and tuberculosis

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Testifying against the bill, House Bill 1691, because it reinserts into the firefighters presumption
• This old presumption language and that, that uh monograph resulted in many disputes with firefighters
• this language back in the uncertainty of which the cancers, which cancers are covered under the presumption
• Of what cancers are covered under the presumption stature to the International Agency for Research on
• with using the IRC in the statute because it creates a situation where we have to prove that a presumption

Transcript Highlights:

• fathers to easily overcome the presumption or prove themselves excluded without a full and expensive
• fathers to easily overcome the presumption or prove themselves excluded without a full and expensive
• I really want to see that rebuttable presumption.
• I really want to see that rebuttable presumption.
• The presumption has to do with creating a danger to health, correct?

Bills: SB1012, SB1099, SB1234, SB1392, SB1489, SB1535, SB1570, SB1609, SB1627, SB1634, SB1661, SB1709, SB1723, SB1725, SB1743, SB1829, SCR1027, SCR1040, SCR1048

Keywords: concealed carry, firearms, restaurants, liquor licensing, public safety, defamation, private figure, public concern, statute of limitations, internet defamation, juvenile court, legal representation, appointed attorney, guardian ad litem, child welfare, election canvass, canvassing board, governing body, election inspection, election access