Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate approves public-safety conference report after debate over resisting-law enforcement, bail and obscene-performance injunctions
Summary
The Senate adopted the conference committee report for House Bill 1014 after discussion about changes to crimes-of-violence definitions, resisting law enforcement, virtual bail hearings and a new injunctive remedy for “obscene performances” funded by public entities.
The Senate voted to adopt the conference committee report for House Bill 1014 after floor debate over multiple public-safety and criminal-code revisions, including updated definition language, sentencing aggravators and a provision that authorizes private injunctive suits challenging government-funded “obscene performances.”
Senator Glick presented the report and described a number of substantive edits to the bill, including updated cross-references for resisting law enforcement with a vehicle, replacement of an outdated term for child sexual content, changes to juvenile jurisdiction, and new aggravators and mitigators for sentencing. The report also allows virtual bail hearings to be conducted by Zoom if transcribed and directs in-person bail hearings in certain domestic-violence cases before release.
On the floor, Senator Pohl—who stated he is a sponsor of parts of the measure—said he supported elements of the bill such as a misdemeanor for depositing contaminants on land but opposed codifying certain sentencing aggravators and the requirement that defendants must complete substance-use treatment within a fixed period to receive a mitigating consideration. “I don't know whether or not... requiring that they actually complete could be problematic,” Pohl said, noting access to treatment may be limited.
A notable and contested provision allows any person to seek injunctive relief against a government entity that organizes or funds an “obscene performance,” and if successful the plaintiff could recover attorney fees and court costs. Senator Ford questioned the meaning and scope of “obscene performance,” asking for the definition and whether examples like professional cheerleading or waitstaff performances could be covered; Senator Glick replied, “you'll know it when you see it,” referencing Justice Potter Stewart’s oft-cited test for obscenity.
Senators expressed concern that the injunctive remedy could chill artistic programming or be used to tie up events in litigation. Senator Pohl called that prospect “a chilling effect” on government-sponsored performances and said that gave him reason to oppose the conference report, despite supporting parts of the bill.
The Senate closed debate and recorded passage of the conference committee report by a roll call tally of 42 ayes and 8 noes. The Secretary was directed to inform the House of the passage.
