Video & Transcript Research : 'noise amplification'

Page 1 of 70
AL

Alabama 2025 Regular Session

Alabama Senate County and Municipal Government Committee Apr 2nd, 2025

County and Municipal Government

Transcript Highlights:
  • In 2022, Project Say Something won a federal lawsuit against the City of Florence for applying noise
  • Lines 50 through 52 prohibit noise amplification near a residence with the intent to harass or disturb
  • allow municipalities or counties to also adopt ordinances and resolutions to regulate the time and noise
  • It's going to be hard to not consider these factors when discussing noise regulations. ...it's going
  • Now, in Birmingham, we do have a noise ordinance, and so that may usurp what they already have.
HI

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

Senate Floor Session 03-19-2026 11:30am

Hawaii Senate Floor Meeting

TX

Texas 89th Regular

S/C on County & Regional Government May 5th, 2025

S/C on County & Regional Government

Transcript Highlights:
  • Counties currently cannot regulate nighttime noise levels in unincorporated residential areas, leaving
  • law enforcement the ability to combat the upsurge in undue noise.
  • My closest neighbor that's making noise is two and a half acres away, and I still get kept up and my
  • Today, there was a loud noise.
  • Since then, Texas counties have been unable to regulate noise effectively.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • Or noise made by those who are more liberal or what have you.
  • That would be prohibiting the use of drums, sound amplification, and invitation of outside speakers.
  • I suppose the attendant... ...talks about bullhorn speakers, amplification of speech, that sort of thing
  • You work with them for location and time of day and amplification and possibly access and things of that
  • You work with them for location and time of day and amplification and possibly access and things of that
Summary: The joint Senate and House Select Committee on Civil Discourse and Freedom of Speech in Higher Education convened for its first public hearing, adopted its proposed rules without objection, and framed the hearing as an organizational, invited-testimony-only session. Members repeatedly condemned political violence and the assassination of Charlie Kirk, saying the committee was created in response to concerns about civil discourse, intimidation, and hostility on college campuses. Several members emphasized that the goal was not to suppress speech but to protect open expression while maintaining order, due process, and institutional accountability. The first witness, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Commissioner Wyn Rosser, outlined implementation of Senate Bill 37. He described the General Education Advisory Committee, which is reviewing broad core-curriculum knowledge and skills and may recommend reducing the current 42-hour core, while leaving review of specific courses to individual institutions. He also explained the new Office of the Ombudsman, the board’s role in supporting it, and existing training and certification requirements for governing board members. Members asked about enforcement tools, transparency, and whether the ombudsman would investigate complaints involving censorship, retaliation, or political bias; Rosser said some enforcement exists in certain laws, but he deferred on the exact scope of the ombudsman’s investigatory authority and on issues outside the agency’s role. University of Texas at Austin President Jim Davis testified that UT Austin supports free speech, academic freedom, and civil discourse, and he described three areas of focus: speech on campus grounds, classroom discourse, and how people treat one another. He said the university enforces time, place, and manner rules, expects professors to present alternative views on controversial topics, and has created internal reporting and appeal processes for students and faculty. Members questioned him about heckler’s veto incidents, protests, off-campus participants, complaints about professors, hate speech, and whether the university would protect speakers and students from disruption or unfair targeting. Davis said the university would not tolerate disruptions, would use due process and factual review, and is working to align campus practices with the new law and regents’ expectations. Ricky Adam Jr. of Turning Point USA’s Club America described the group’s campus and high-school organizing, praised Charlie Kirk’s approach to open debate, and said the organization is expanding in Texas. He raised concerns about school administrators and a counselor at an Early College High School in Killeen allegedly interfering with a student club and withholding footage, and committee members said they would seek information and, if necessary, use legislative process to investigate. Members from both chambers reiterated support for free speech, criticized political violence and campus suppression of viewpoints, and stressed that future hearings would continue examining implementation and enforcement issues.
OK

Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session

Senate Legislative Session Feb 4th, 2026 at 01:30 pm

Oklahoma Senate Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • Did the incident include noise amplification that disrupted the service?
  • that by uttering any profane discourse, committing any rude or indecent act, making any necessary noise
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • you're a conservative, that you're. it's harder to be heard or there's more sort of a tension. or noise
  • semesters when finals are being undertaken, that would be prohibiting the use of drums, sound amplification
  • However, after 5 p.m., you can make reservations to use amplification. sound in other areas both in the
  • creating an environment where our students can't have a good night's sleep. their dorm because the noise
  • It mostly talks about bullhorn speakers, amplification of speech, that sort of thing.
Keywords: 1185, senate, all
NH

New Hampshire 2026 Regular Session

Senate Judiciary (04/21/2026)

Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:
  • to enforce for noise complaints, nothing to<00:45:31.960> enforce<00:45:32.640> for<00
  • water quality noise. water quality noise. 51%<00:46:40.480> 52%<00:46:41.840> rational
  • Likewise, if the noise is excessively high and going to ruin the community, it's a harder standard to
  • So, based on your question, Senator Gannon, we have documented noise issues in Texas around this kind
  • <03:11:33.280> across repeated amplification across repeated amplification across communication
Keywords: 1191, senate, all
TX

Texas 89th 2nd C.S.

Natural Resources Jun 23rd, 2026

Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:
  • Second, there's recent amplification—there's recent evidence of the Chinese Communist Party, in specific
  • Second, there's recent amplification.
  • There are three recent instances of Chinese Communist Party amplification of the debate and fight within
  • The thing is, these people live with this noise and this vibration 24-7, 365 days a year.
  • They can learn about noise and what are we doing about that.
Keywords: 1184, house, all
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Education K-16 (Part II) Apr 16th, 2025

Education K-16

Transcript Highlights:
  • disruptive or unsafe behavior, including Areas excludes disruptive or unsafe behavior, including amplification
  • place, time, and manner restrictions should be done on free speech, whether it should be, what amplification
  • The ban on sound amplification during class hours essentially eliminates the daytime window for outdoor
Summary: The Senate Education Committee K-16 resumed public testimony on Senate Bill 735, a Holocaust education bill. Alice Min spoke in support, saying learning about difficult parts of history is important for understanding American history and the experiences of minority communities. Sheila Hemphill also supported the bill but urged broader language to include multiple genocides and more instructional material. After a brief exchange, public testimony on SB 735 closed and the bill was left pending. The committee then heard Senate Bill 800, which would strengthen higher-education orientation materials on sexual harassment, sexual assault, dating violence, and stalking policies, and Senate Bill 2310, which would require public institutions to post clearer online degree and transfer requirements. Both bills were explained by their authors, committee substitutes were adopted, no public testimony was offered, and each bill was left pending. Senate Bill 2055, a cleanup bill for the Texas Leadership Scholars Program, was also heard and left pending after no testimony. A major portion of the meeting focused on Senate Bill 1069, which would require investigations and mandatory termination for faculty found to have discriminated against students based on religion, with a department placed under conservatorship after a termination. The author said the bill was meant to address religious discrimination and protect students; several witnesses, including Muslim and Jewish law students and other advocates, argued it was too vague, lacked a definition of religious discrimination, threatened academic freedom, and could chill speech. The bill was left pending after testimony. The committee also heard Senate Bill 2972, which would set new limits on expressive activity on public university campuses, including restrictions on encampments, masks, sound amplification, and protests during finals; opponents said it would restrict free speech and protest rights, while the bill was adopted as a committee substitute and left pending. Senate Bill 2815, allowing students to choose the diploma name after a university merger or renaming, was briefly heard and left pending. Later, the committee took up pending business and voted out several bills. SB 2920, SB 2398, SB 2927, SB 2929, SB 1241, SB 1395, SB 401, SB 1972, and SB 2540 were reported favorably, with some committee substitutes adopted and several placed on the local and uncontested calendar. SB 1241’s substitute would have the Higher Education Coordinating Board study standardized test equivalency scores for admissions. The committee then recessed subject to the call of the chair.
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • Such conduct may include talking or making loud noises from the audience, uttering loud, threatening,
  • way you're moving, especially for young people, this kind of content through various forms of amplification
Summary: The committee hearing covered several bills related to privacy, consumer protection, and online harms. SB 259 by Senator Wahab would prohibit surveillance pricing based on device data such as geolocation or battery level; supporters argued it would curb discriminatory and predatory pricing, while opponents raised concerns about geolocation definitions, legitimate location-based pricing, and impacts on discounts and loyalty programs. The bill was moved on a due pass motion to the Judiciary Committee and passed 8-1, with members noting amendments and ongoing discussions with stakeholders. SB 22 by Senator Laird would raise the amount of gift cards that can be redeemed for cash, with the author saying the goal is to update the long-standing $10 threshold for inflation and preserve consumer value. Consumer advocates supported the bill, while retailers, restaurants, grocers, and chambers of commerce opposed or opposed unless amended, citing fraud concerns, safety issues, and the need for clarification on donated or returned gift cards. The committee voted the bill out on a 6-1 vote and kept it on call. SB 576 by Senator Umberg would apply broadcast-style loudness rules to streaming advertisements. The author said the bill is intended to prevent ads from being much louder than programming, especially for children, while the opposition argued that streaming ad insertion is technically different and that existing industry standards and FCC oversight already address the issue. The bill passed 8-0. SB 683 by Senator Cortese would clarify that people can seek injunctive relief, including a TRO, for unauthorized use of name, image, or likeness; supporters said it strengthens privacy protections, while opponents warned about prior restraint and First Amendment concerns. The bill was moved out on a due pass motion and kept on call. The final bill discussed, SB 771 by Senator Stern, would clarify that existing civil rights and hate-related laws apply to social media platforms and their algorithms, with higher penalties for intentional or reckless violations. Supporters, including the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the Islamic Networks Group, described online hate as fueling real-world violence and urged stronger accountability; opponents argued the bill could conflict with Section 230, chill lawful speech, and create vague standards. Members raised questions about constitutionality, definitions, and whether the bill would be workable, but several expressed support for the author’s goals.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • time, and manner of restrictions should be placed on free speech, whether it should include what amplification
  • The ban on sound amplification during class hours essentially eliminates the daytime window for outdoor