Bills: HB6, HB120, HB210

Keywords: higher education, LGBTQ studies, DEI studies, program prohibition, educational policy

Transcript Highlights:

• There was nothing that would prohibit you, as you said, from correctly doing that Senator Goodwin waves
• districts, the fire protection districts who are not tied to a municipality, we didn't want it to be prohibitive

Bills: HB3045

Keywords: accident response, motor vehicle, law enforcement, fire department, fee prohibition, 914, all

Bills: SB171

Keywords: navigable waters, non-navigable waters, motor vehicle prohibition, criminal penalties, land use, 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Signs, placards, and other objects of similar nature are prohibited.
• Food and drink are prohibited in the hearing room. Members of the committee.
• Signs, placards, or other objects of similar, similar nature are prohibited.
• Food and drink are prohibited in the hearing room.
• Texas has a law prohibiting abortion already in place.

Bills: HB7, SB 8

Keywords: abortion, healthcare, jurisdiction, civil action, qui tam, prohibition, state law, sex designation, restroom access, civil penalties, private civil right of action, women's privacy

Transcript Highlights:

• Signs, placards, and other objects of a similar nature are prohibited.
• Food and drink are also prohibited in the hearing room.
• Signs, placards, or other objects of a similar nature are prohibited.
• Food and drink are also prohibited.
• Texas has a law prohibiting abortion already in place.

Bills: HB7, SB 8, HB7, SB 8

Keywords: abortion, healthcare, jurisdiction, civil action, qui tam, prohibition, state law, sex designation, restroom access, civil penalties, private civil right of action, women's privacy, 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It also prohibits the application of animal waste and sewage sludge.
• It also prohibits the application of animal waste and sewage sludge to impervious surfaces, streets,
• I think what we have done, the precedent I would cite is a very old one, and there is a prohibition on
• I think what we have done, the precedent I would cite is a very old one, and there is a prohibition on
• I think what we have done, the precedent I would cite is a very old one, and there is a prohibition on

Bills: HF858, HF2577, HF2576

Keywords: bioincentive payments, agriculture, job creation, environmental compliance, financial reporting, waste handling, sewage sludge, PFAS regulation, environment, record retention, fertilizer disposal, pesticide disposal, environmental impact, safety regulations, burning prohibition, 1183, house

Bills: HB 214, HB 626, HB 647, HB 658, HB 668, HB 674, HB 908

Keywords: firearm acquisition, gun smuggling, criminal offenses, ammunition, terrorism, public safety, driver's license, vision correction, medical verification, Texas Department of Public Safety, renewal fees, weapons, community supervision, law enforcement, retired officers, prohibition, criminal liability, missing children, national reporting, investigation

Transcript Highlights:

• um, where there's a 0.19, where it's entitled discrimination against persons with disabilities prohibited
• um, where there's a 0.19, where it's entitled discrimination against persons with disabilities prohibited
• With disabilities prohibited.

Bills: HF3661, HF2380, HF3468, HF3483

Keywords: facial recognition, privacy, government surveillance, public safety, data protection, civil liberties, disability rights, discrimination, accommodations, employment, housing, public services, education, civil action, failure to render aid, damages, Minnesota Statutes, legal liability, trespass, civil immigration enforcement

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from February 24 and February 26. It then took up House File 3661, a bill originally authored by Representative Gomez and presented by Representative Feist, which would ban government use of facial recognition technology and be re-referred to the Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee. The committee adopted the A1 amendment, described as a technical amendment based on House Research recommendations, before hearing testimony on the bill. Representative Feist said the bill is aimed at preventing serious privacy and civil-liberties harms, including secretive surveillance, racial and gender bias, and the lack of statewide rules governing government use of facial recognition. Supportive testimony came from Chad Marlo of the ACLU, who argued the issue is bipartisan, the technology has accuracy problems, and government use is expanding against vulnerable groups. Chris Wayland of Restore the Fourth Minnesota also supported a ban, emphasizing the inability to opt out of facial recognition and the lack of standards, disclosure, and community input. Rich Newmeister urged stronger transparency measures, including agency policies and public notice in buildings using the technology. Major Spencer Baky of the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office opposed an outright ban, saying facial recognition is used only as an investigative lead, not for positive identification or real-time surveillance, and that results are corroborated before use. He said the office has used the tool in hundreds of investigations and supports a statutory framework with safeguards instead of a ban. In member discussion, Representative Hudson argued a blanket ban was too broad and suggested a more targeted evidentiary approach, while Representative Moller and Representative Kurr expressed concern about misuse and the federal government's use of the technology. Representative Durant asked whether there was a current Minnesota problem and whether stakeholders and law enforcement had been involved in drafting the bill. No final vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided, beyond adoption of the amendment and the committee’s continued consideration of HF 3661.

Bills: HF3600, HF3809, HF3608

Keywords: housing, community land trusts, competitive development, development programs, Minnesota, HF3809, Minnesota eviction law, landlord-tenant, residential lease, minor child, children in eviction, eviction complaint, defendant prohibition, expedited eviction, expedited hearing, summary eviction, tenant protections, housing policy, civil penalty, nonwaivable lease terms

Bills: HB39, HB114, HB1875, HB1894, HB1965, HB2513, HB39, HB114

Keywords: veterans, mental health, Texas Veterans Commission, peer support, suicide prevention, community mental health, grant program, cemetery, General Land Office, burial plot, remembrance, monthly designation, honoring military, Texas legislation, rural services, paid leave, fire protection personnel, military service, public employees, employment benefits

Bills: HB39, HB114, HB39, HB114, HB1875, HB1894, HB1965, HB2513

Keywords: public school finance, property values, homestead exemptions, funding allocation, education policy, public school bonds, school funding, guarantee prohibition, education finance, state law change, veterans, mental health, Texas Veterans Commission, peer support, suicide prevention, community mental health, grant program, cemetery, General Land Office, burial plot

Bills: SB 82, SB 1807, SB 2254, HB 119, HB 130, HB 581, HJR 98, SB 1988

Keywords: business liability, concealed carry, handgun policy, premises liability, criminal acts, civil liability, business premises, concealed handgun, property liability, property rights, gun regulations, criminal liability, protective order, confidentiality, personal information, court records, victim protection, charitable raffle, nonprofit, wildlife conservation

Transcript Highlights:

• So, House File 3642 as amended is a bill to prohibit crypto kiosks in Minnesota.
• Um, so I just wanted to be here today to voice my support for prohibiting these ATMs.
• support for uh prohibiting these ATMs. support for uh prohibiting these ATMs.
• However, it is important to note that this ban does not prohibit cryptocurrency itself.
• not prohibit cryptocurrency itself. not prohibit cryptocurrency itself.

Bills: HF3642, HF2700, HF3615

Keywords: virtual currency, kiosks, prohibition, customer payouts, cryptocurrency regulation, consumer privacy, data privacy, health data, sensitive data, Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act, personal data, data broker, targeted advertising, geofencing, location tracking, health care privacy, patient privacy, consent, minor privacy, children's privacy

Summary: The Commerce Finance and Policy Committee met on House File 3642, which would prohibit virtual currency kiosks in Minnesota. The bill was laid over, and the committee adopted a DE1 author’s amendment. Chair Kaggel and Representative Perryman described the measure as a response to widespread scams using crypto kiosks, especially against older adults and other vulnerable people, and said they would continue working with the Department of Commerce and other stakeholders. Testimony from law enforcement and advocates strongly supported the ban. A St. Cloud police sergeant and a Woodbury detective described cases in which victims lost large sums, said the current safeguards and refund rules are being bypassed, and argued that the kiosks are difficult to investigate because funds move quickly and often overseas. An AARP Minnesota volunteer also supported the bill, saying kiosks are a preferred tool for scammers and that existing protections have not kept pace with the problem. The Department of Commerce said it strongly supports the bill and reported that it has received 120 complaints over three years involving nearly $1 million in reported losses, with 2025 the worst year so far. The main opposition came from CoinFlip’s general counsel, who argued that the problem is fraud generally, not kiosks themselves, and said Minnesota already has consumer protections, including refunds for eligible victims. He urged stronger regulation rather than a ban, citing blockchain analytics, hold periods, and 24-hour customer service as alternatives. Committee members then asked questions about how long kiosks have operated in Minnesota, how many there are, who owns them, and the scale of losses; Commerce said there are hundreds statewide, operated by a variety of companies, and that reported losses are likely undercounts.

Bills: HB17, HB41, HB118, HB119, HB127, HB128, HB129, HB130, HB132, HB133

Keywords: property tax, school funding, enrollment changes, inflation adjustment, tax rate notice, ad valorem taxes, disabled, elderly, homesteads, tax limitation, diversity, equity, inclusion, LGBTQ, state agencies, prohibition, heat illness prevention, workplace safety, administrative penalties, advisory board

Bills: HB13, HB13

Keywords: firearms, assault weapons, minors, prohibition, criminal penalties, HB13, Laken Riley Act, illegal immigration, immigration enforcement, ICE, Department of Homeland Security, DHS, Department of Justice, DOJ, immigration detainer, detainer request, I-247, Law Enforcement Support Center, LESC, county jail

Transcript Highlights:

• Some of these foreign entities pose national security risks yet without clear prohibitions.
• It strikes me as a problem to prohibit professors from endorsing that.
• Amendment rights so that they don't feel afraid to speak But to have a prohibition...
• I think a fix for that would be to instead of prohibiting endorsement to prohibit inculcation or to assert
• And to Senator Creighton, we've heard a lot of comments concerning the prohibition against.

Bills: SB37, SB1489, SB452, SB724, SB1067, SB1741, SB1273

Keywords: higher education, curriculum review, governing board, faculty council, ombudsman, faculty governance, decision-making, transparency, public meetings, department head, employment approval, public institutions, institutional oversight, education, funding, accountability, state budget, school performance, employment, Texas legislation

Transcript Highlights:

• Two, by prohibiting universities from accepting gifts, grants, or donations... ...from the government

Bills: SB37, SB1489, SB452, SB724, SB1067, SB1741, SB1273

Keywords: higher education, curriculum review, governing board, faculty council, ombudsman, faculty governance, decision-making, transparency, public meetings, department head, employment approval, public institutions, institutional oversight, education, funding, accountability, state budget, school performance, employment, Texas legislation

Transcript Highlights:

• those rural pathways and how they put those programs together because there were certain statutory prohibitions
• Is there anything in the statutes that prohibits or acts as an impediment to doing that?

Bills: HB20, HB120

Keywords: fraudulent solicitation, disaster relief, nonprofit organizations, criminal penalties, consumer protection, fraud prevention, charitable donations, higher education, LGBTQ studies, DEI studies, program prohibition, educational policy, HB120, Texas, Texas Education Code, public universities, public colleges, queer studies, gay studies, lesbian studies

Bills: SB57, SB155, HB39, HB77, HB104, SB57, SB155, HB39, HB77, HB104

Keywords: property, acknowledgment, conveyance, business entities, limited liability companies, state employees, payroll deduction, salary deduction, comptroller, membership association, membership dues, voluntary contributions, insurance premiums, financial instruments, deferred compensation, state payroll, employee benefits, association dues, withholding, Alabama Code 36-1-4.3

Transcript Highlights:

• We are also supportive of section 5 of the bill, which prohibits detention solely on the basis of immigration

Bills: HF2354, HF3621, HF3429, HF3483

Keywords: medical assistance, fraud prevention, subpoena authority, criminal penalties, consumer protection, fraud, payment withholding, withheld payments, program integrity, public funds, state agency, program participant, credible allegation of fraud, administrative reconsideration, contested case, chapter 14, data practices, confidential data, protected nonpublic data, anti-fraud

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from March 5 by voice vote and welcomed new member Representative Van Binsbergen. It then took up House File 2354, which Chair Liebling moved to re-refer to the Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee. Representative Norris presented the bill as an updated version of the Medical Assistance Protection Act, aimed at strengthening the Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, closing loopholes, equalizing fraud penalties, and increasing penalties for large-scale Medicaid fraud. Attorney General Ellison said the bill would add 18 specialized staff to the unit, moving it from 32 to 50 positions, and argued the federal-state matching structure makes the Attorney General’s office the proper home for the funding because the unit is dedicated to Medicaid fraud work. Nick Wonka, director of the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, explained the bill’s provisions affecting committee jurisdiction: expanded subpoena authority to obtain financial account contents in provider-fraud investigations, conforming legal representation language to preserve the unit’s authority, venue changes to allow charging in counties where parts of the offense occurred, and a restitution change to let courts order restitution for related conduct in the same scheme. He said the subpoena change would speed investigations and align the Attorney General’s authority with other agencies, and that the restitution change would help recover more fraudulently obtained Medicaid funds. No public testimony was offered. Members questioned why the funding should go to the Attorney General’s office rather than the BCA, whether the new records authority was federally required, how the venue language would work across state lines, and whether the added FTEs indicated the fraud problem was larger than expected. Ellison and Wonka responded that the federal grant requires the work to stay within the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, that the unit’s investigators are specialized and work with, but separate from, law enforcement, and that the venue provision applies only within Minnesota while out-of-state matters would be referred to the appropriate authorities. The amendment that had been posted was withdrawn and not offered.