House members passed House Bill 124, a plan by Representative Freyberg to redraw the 19th Judicial District Court from three election sections into two and to add one at‑large judgeship, after an extended floor debate about demographics, legal opinions and germane amendments.

Representative Freyberg, the bill’s author, told the chamber that the change aims to equalize population among the districts after 30 years without redrawing: “We now have a 1.5 [percent deviation] ... the nineteenth JDC is a little different from any other JDCs in the state because we take all of the cases here that are brought against the state or the executive branch,” she said on the floor.

The bill’s nut graf centered on population shifts in East Baton Rouge Parish and a desire — the author said — to make subdistrict populations more equal. Freiberg cited advice she said she received from the attorney general and other attorneys in support of including an at‑large seat, and listed a fiscal note she said estimated about $260,000 for a postcard mailing tied to the election in 2026.

Opponents and questioners raised three core concerns during the floor exchange: whether an at‑large seat would violate an existing consent decree, whether changing one judicial district without addressing other courts would be “piecemeal,” and whether the legal advice Freiberg referenced existed in writing. Representative Jordan repeatedly pressed the author on the consent decree and asked whether written legal opinions supported the at‑large seat; Freiberg said she had “legal opinions from judges, from attorneys” and that the attorney general “supports what I'm doing,” but acknowledged that some of the communications she described were conversational rather than formal, written memos.

Representative Marcel offered amendments to include redistricting of the Court of Appeal for East Baton Rouge Parish and Family Court, arguing for parity across court systems and presenting maps he said would produce more balanced racial representation. Freiberg objected, saying the amendments were not germane because the bill focused on the nineteenth JDC; the chair ruled the Marcel amendments not germane and they were not adopted.

The House ultimately voted to pass the bill on final passage. The transcript records the result as “5355 yays, 29 nays” on the roll call recorded on the floor.

The bill’s outcome leaves questions that members pressed on the floor unanswered in writing: Freiberg said the at‑large seat was recommended by attorneys she consulted, but members asked for documented legal opinions and for a fuller review of related courts.

Representative Freiberg requested favorable passage and the measure was moved to final passage after debate.

Votes at a glance
House Bill 124 — Final passage: transcript roll call recorded as “5355 yays, 29 nays.” (Motion moved by Representative Freiberg; second not specified in the transcript.)