Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Continuing Legal Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee votes down resolution asking Supreme Court to add CLE hour on legislative process; sponsor later asks to defer
Summary
A House committee rejected a concurrent resolution urging the Louisiana Supreme Court to require one continuing legal education hour on the legislative process, then the sponsor voluntarily deferred the measure after members raised concerns about practicality and existing CLE structures.
The committee voted 4–8 against Senate Concurrent Resolution 31, which would have requested that the Louisiana Supreme Court add a one‑hour course on the legislative process to attorneys' annual continuing legal education (CLE) requirements.
Sen. Kathy, the sponsor, said the resolution grew from concerns about attorney familiarity with how constitutional amendments and legislation work. "I saw many comments on social media, from attorneys that outright blew my mind the lack of understanding of the legislative process some of them had," she said. She described the measure as an "urgent request" to the court rather than a statutory mandate.
Members pressing concerns included Representative Lacombe and Representative LaFleur, who noted law schools already teach legislative drafting and that many CLE courses already include legislative updates. Representative LaFleur also suggested an exemption for legislators who are attorneys and for legislative staff. Representative Jordan questioned whether the resolution could practically require attorneys who travel for specialized CLE to take an additional one‑hour course and said the measure could be burdensome; Sen. Kathy replied the resolution was flexible about content and implementation.
After a floor roll call rejected the measure 4 yeas to 8 nays, the sponsor moved to voluntarily defer the resolution for further discussion and amendment; the committee granted the deferral.
