Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Academic Freedom Education Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Rules office flags overbroad language in HB2867 that could affect higher-education coursework; sponsor to consider floor amendment

2399218 · February 25, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Rules Committee's staff said one provision in House Bill 2867 that would bar schools and teachers from requiring students to advocate for or against a topic as a condition for credit could be read so broadly it would affect speech-and-debate and law-class exercises; the sponsor has signaled willingness to accept a limiting floor amendment.

House Bill 2867 addresses a prohibition on teaching antisemitism and related conduct; the rules attorney told the committee one provision in the bill raised concerns because it extended to higher education.

"Our concern with this bill was one specific provision that was seen in both the original language and in the amendment that also includes higher education institutions, and that is the part that prohibits schools and teachers from requiring a student to advocate for or against a specific topic or point of view to receive credit across every subject area for coursework or to receive credits that are necessary to graduate," Rules attorney Holder said. She said that language could be read to cover classroom activities such as speech-and-debate assignments or law-school advocacy exercises and described it as potentially "very overbroad and vague."

Holder said the sponsor has indicated willingness to work on a floor amendment to limit that requirement "perhaps to the subject of the rest of the bill, which is this antisemitism and antisemitic conduct." The rules office said it is working with the sponsor to narrow the language.

Committee members did not take a formal vote on the provision during the Rules Committee session; the record shows the rules office recommended the sponsor consider a floor amendment and that staff will assist with drafting.

The exchange occurred during a mass-motion review of multiple measures; committee members subsequently approved the mass motion for a bundle of bills (see separate summary).