[{"_1":2,"_124":-5,"_125":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6304042,"mediaKeyId","2469355-649dde3d8d3a0267cd98a3134b98c8da","parentId",2469355,"title","House hearing spotlights bipartisan push to require asbestos transparency, limit over-naming in lawsuits","audioSeconds",1508,"startMs",252000,"endMs",1760000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2469355-649dde3d8d3a0267cd98a3134b98c8da&start=252&end=1760","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2469355-649dde3d8d3a0267cd98a3134b98c8da/thumbnail_252000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6304042/Montana/House-hearing-spotlights-bipartisan-push-to-require-asbestos-transparency-limit-over-naming-in-lawsuits","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6304042-389d31bccf69a33be4c223d7d3b7dbee/orig.mp4?Expires=1770846994&Signature=Qj1pw3h2shEPNbTCx1wu7zO1sRVrexGETT7VjIFETe5Qircpx2ssSIfLrRghBUyH35yAiO9VIHX4nuGLbAlrqLG0VFiL4kOQa89vu~R1LT-3HlTeqhcXxPRvuIxV~nsyQvSr3tT1SaINuSyUZkSfn5IKgFGu4G3vzjDz229k4OMn1mGeIp7BznTBQYn~j-cuVFV3knvrp-HSGui3g6kJoAAgqmSdaO-9ELxBVUK-JRTUMzp1~PcZukLPRM4InHNnFDYQz5MtfcggenKOzfOts3KKXVjXs0xuAdFHK2gk0~B8adUOGHHkricgrPM-yMf-JN-3dcHJ6dkxTCClEc00~Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Montana Legislature","date","2025-03-01T00:00:00Z","article","Representative Greg Overstreet, sponsor of House Bill 803, told the House Judiciary Committee the bill aims to make asbestos litigation more transparent and to prevent companies from being named without proof of exposure. \"This morning I bring to you House Bill 803, a bill that brings forward important reforms to ensuring legitimate asbestos claims are handled efficiently and expeditiously through our courts and that plaintiffs are justly and timely compensated,\" Overstreet said.

The bill has two principal components. The first would require plaintiffs to disclose and accelerate filing claims they have submitted to asbestos bankruptcy trusts so juries see the full exposure history. \"By removing the disconnect that presently exists between the asbestos trust and civil justice system, juries will be able to hear all of a plaintiff's exposures to asbestos,\" Overstreet said. The second section would require brief factual disclosures tying each defendant to the plaintiff's exposure, which sponsors said will reduce over-naming and limit wasteful defense costs.

Proponents at the hearing included Charles Robinson, testifying for the Montana Chamber of Commerce, who described concerns that duplicate or manipulated trust filings can deplete compensation resources: \"We urge you a yes for HB 803 because it protects asbestos trust funds against double dipping and streamlines asbestos lawsuits by requiring basic due diligence before filing legal complaints.\" Mark Behrens, with the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, and Lee Nickis of the American Tort Reform Association also supported the measure and handed committee members examples of bankruptcy trust claim forms to show how easily claims can be filed.

Opponents included attorneys representing long-running Libby-area claims. Roger Sullivan told the committee there is only one remaining defendant in Montana asbestos litigation there and argued that transparency requirements already exist under Montana's civil rules. He warned the bill could further delay compensation for Libby victims and allow a remaining defendant to take a setoff based on trust claims that have not yet been resolved. Another opponent, Al Smith, told the committee the bill would benefit large out-of-state corporations and urged members to stand with Montana residents instead.

Members pressed witnesses on practical effects. Representative Staffman asked whether the bill would make it easier or harder for Libby victims to obtain compensation; Sullivan replied it would further delay their recoveries. Overstreet and proponents responded that the bill would not change trust processing under federal bankruptcy law and that the required disclosures are low-bar, intended only to show a basis for naming a defendant.

The hearing record shows substantial agreement that duplicative filings and indiscriminate defendant naming are real issues nationally, while opponents emphasized local litigation history, constitutional concerns, and potential harms for long-running local claims such as Libby. The committee closed the hearing without an immediate vote recorded in the transcript.

Ending: The committee heard the testimony and closed the hearing on HB 803; no committee vote on the bill is recorded in the transcript.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Judiciary 2025-03-01","oneSentenceSummary","Representative Greg Overstreet told the House Judiciary Committee his House Bill 803 would require plaintiffs to disclose asbestos trust filings early in civil cases and would demand minimal factual ties before defendants are named, aiming to speed recoveries and curb indiscriminate over-naming.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature MT, Montana","taxId",77694,"location","Montana","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6304028,"Committee hears bills to extend malpractice and insurance coverage windows for minors harmed by gender-transition care",3721,6979000,10700000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2469355-649dde3d8d3a0267cd98a3134b98c8da&start=6979&end=10700","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2469355-649dde3d8d3a0267cd98a3134b98c8da/thumbnail_6979000.jpg","/articles/6304028/Montana/Committee-hears-bills-to-extend-malpractice-and-insurance-coverage-windows-for-minors-harmed-by-gender-transition-care","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6304028-d2cd34d9dd5566de73eb3ef2cea97a26/orig.mp4?Expires=1770846994&Signature=OJ8HHtGmYtT4iYe74z4bychVY1idIeRBZUDXvisM7YaQ4ycCkOTXTQVdQ5~8W8cpEI6ib6pbZjOVlq9sDEyAqX4NYxpxXaKGK0bQjyifsnDll8Bw86SYAXKU-A1If6N7YseQbOuNacyCGcxAKT77VGTdzhc1mI4EdvcYsU3o8riKy9JlN4ilD0n9dLoRE2PPLkLZ1jU~7gfFLKdsgqd8lKWkeHBdFLZt7wsh5OsTAUkTi9xDqOmbCGG5wpBX3oA6A24KJR6cQwfRYsohtTWxALbPLCacFNE0DIe-l9EPCyuwAAVYgoyrQFh8rOwjaCWqVZKZ59-p8cughXxss3FQmw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Greg Komets introduced House Bill 682 as a measure to provide civil remedies and insurance reciprocity for minors who later claim harm from gender-transition medical care. \"Detransitioners are real. They do exist, and they deserve protection and empowerment to help undo some of the damage done to them by health practitioners,\" Komets said in opening remarks.

Proponents included detransitioners who described personal medical harms after hormones and surgeries and urged availability of reconstruction care and longer civil windows to sue for malpractice. Elle Palmer, who said she began testosterone at 16 and detransitioned at 19, testified that she received limited clinical guidance and later experienced lasting effects. Other witnesses included clinicians and leaders of detransitioner networks describing difficulty obtaining insurance coverage for reconstructive or reversal services.

Supporters urged civil recourse: Derek Streicher of the Montana Family Foundation described the bill as providing accountability and strict liability for irreversible interventions done to minors. Proponents argued that minors cannot reliably consent to life-altering interventions because the adolescent brain is still developing.

Opponents included medical associations and providers. The Montana Hospital Association opposed the bill, arguing it would restrict clinicians and undermine the standard of care and that a 25‑year period to sue far exceeds ordinary malpractice statutes. Planned Parenthood Advocates of Montana and other opponents said current medical standards and informed-consent processes govern care and warned that extended civil exposure could deter providers from practicing in Montana. Several clinicians and family-law practitioners also questioned the policy tradeoffs.

Committee members asked detailed questions about the proposed 25‑year window, the definition of procedures covered, and how to distinguish minors treated for other medical conditions from those receiving gender-related care. Some members said they wanted more time to study the complex policy and medical evidence.

Ending: The hearing drew widespread testimony on both sides; the committee closed public testimony and recorded follow-up questions but did not take a committee vote during the session transcribed.","House Bill 682 would extend statutes of limitation and require insurer reciprocity for detransition care after minors receive gender-transition treatments; the bill drew detailed testimony from detransitioners, clinicians and medical associations.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6304033,"Committee hearing on bill that would treat parental support for child gender transition as custody factor draws large turnout",2839,3096000,5935000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2469355-649dde3d8d3a0267cd98a3134b98c8da&start=3096&end=5935","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2469355-649dde3d8d3a0267cd98a3134b98c8da/thumbnail_3096000.jpg","/articles/6304033/Montana/Committee-hearing-on-bill-that-would-treat-parental-support-for-child-gender-transition-as-custody-factor-draws-large-turnout","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6304033-f23477ea3d1e1d4222e1894a28511738/orig.mp4?Expires=1770846994&Signature=BcLUZbN9wBSt4OI9jlf4dU4nJ3j4EA-WlMTwleIFHbY-1Aw4-xsd9nOdxrgfsZ5GjWCiWUo99ZPb0maJZHEV7Rx1pA4bsJTBNpd82L3EIgnVoxZ0kw0Dtkh9iiERm9aGx7EBML6Ovd9pNhdvgTsKdGdom0bjV~T13Wzk~vL5FQfGXzlJZVv0uRAOVoIiMks50FEm0RS01jh0OZKuqMXXg5ZbrefQWyikVHdOKNlbRypXmf~dRBr8QhibjeH3jer2ChYOXkNKvGHNrS0i55u6LRKJSr9BtflCNnranMxUByvhx9VyMfifDG9obYWTI~5G3ISwziJDWO0tMXIZyB8nlw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Lucas Schubert opened House Bill 730, saying the measure would declare that \"it is not in the best interest of children for a parent to support their child's gender transition\" and would make parental encouragement of transition a factor a court \"must consider\" when applying the best-interest standard in custody cases.

Proponents framed the bill as a child-protection measure. Sponsor Schubert said many children, he claimed, will resolve gender dysphoria without irreversible medical or surgical interventions and that parents should refrain from encouraging permanent changes. Jerry O'Neil and Russell Sias testified in support; they described moral and religious objections and urged the committee to protect minors. Other proponents called the practice a form of child abuse.

Opponents included a long roster of family-law practitioners, mental-health professionals and civil-rights groups. Robin Turner of Legal Voice, who said she spent over a decade in family law, argued the bill would distort the best-interest standard and could force courts to equate parental support for a child's gender identity with physical abuse. \"If a parent encourages or actively supports the child's transitioning, it has to be considered as not in the child's best interest,\" she said, warning that the bill would insert mandatory findings into an ordinarily flexible standard.

Family-law practitioners testified the bill is unworkable without a clear definition of \"gender transition.\" Custody attorneys warned the provision could be weaponized in contested parenting cases: Corbin Howard, a longtime family lawyer, said mandatory findings would invite threats and manipulation in hotly contested proceedings. Medical and advocacy witnesses, including clinicians, detransitioners, and representatives from Planned Parenthood Advocates of Montana and the Montana AAP, also weighed in; many opponents described medical consensus in favor of individualized care and warned the bill would risk harming children by removing access to care and splitting families.

Committee members pressed for definitional clarity. Representative Clacken asked for statutory citations referenced by opponents earlier in the day. Sponsor Schubert said definitional details could be addressed on amendment, but he argued the bill's core purpose is to allow courts to consider parental encouragement or support for transition when assessing custody.

Ending: The hearing drew a long line of speakers on both sides and closed with the sponsor asking the committee to give the bill a do pass; no committee vote on HB 730 is recorded in the transcript.","A contentious custody bill, House Bill 730, would require Montana courts to treat a parent's encouragement of a child's gender transition as a factor weighing against the child's best interest, and drew extended testimony from family-law attorneys, clinicians, parents and detransitioners.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6304038,"Committee hears 'Donna's Law' proposal to let people voluntarily block firearm purchases during mental-health crises",508,1771000,2279000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2469355-649dde3d8d3a0267cd98a3134b98c8da&start=1771&end=2279","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2469355-649dde3d8d3a0267cd98a3134b98c8da/thumbnail_1771000.jpg","/articles/6304038/Montana/Committee-hears-Donnas-Law-proposal-to-let-people-voluntarily-block-firearm-purchases-during-mental-health-crises","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6304038-dc1fd84a5d9b002543642aaa1fb2acbc/orig.mp4?Expires=1770846994&Signature=fOoAckW2pp-VhrUx~3AX2X8JRhJ31ObrJClMfnOnB4Ty5Ihxun7jjJr2Bnb6-9rk8I7AjwDW3IWmsmaroA07l5BEh5apsRS~mVrV-RPyISfIaWKzgi~n~8jMSM3kA7Fr3ROwbjlk1dppilEpLDtPLnwO4tzZWbFUd9gkyzRWjU532yYN3SrtF8-gnkKq6F5NCqr2Mv-vLh3hCEtBGe6tqZm5Tlct-v7LVSUKHqS5GpzBBZdPyfsjTWlEKYsgLsvxe72Io-NzFD9h6OcILMlI5iyXIda2TMQQKuX0cyVXLg3gCP5EwVSncI3~wCL4HPYbKr5mZuaA6QCCaNwYk2iFHA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Ed Staffman, sponsor of House Bill 737, described the bill as a voluntary suicide-prevention measure commonly known as Donna’s Law. \"This bill would reduce this tragic death toll by allowing people who fear suicide to voluntarily and confidentially suspend their own ability to purchase firearms,\" testified Frederick Vars (law professor), appearing online in favor.

Staffman explained how the registry would work with a companion safe-storage proposal: clinicians could inform patients about options, including temporary transfer to a gun dealer for storage or, if the person does not own firearms, a short do-not-sell registration that the local sheriff uploads to the FBI instant-check database. The bill allows a requester to remove their name after 21 days with no explanation; it also includes an emergency process for earlier retrieval in rare cases.

Supporters said the cooling-off period addresses the impulsive nature of many suicides: Professor Vars cited research showing most people who survive an attempt later decide to live and said about 100 people had signed up in the four early-adopting states. Frederick Vars also testified for himself about personal experience with bipolar disorder and support for the bill.

Questions from committee members covered logistics and safeguards. Representative Clacken asked for the constitutional citation that opponents had mentioned in other hearings; Al Smith (opponent) supplied Article 13, Section 1, Subsection 2 during a different bill's hearing. Representatives asked staff and the sponsor how immediate and reliable access to the FBI-backed list would be; the sponsor said local sheriffs can upload and remove entries electronically and that the system is intended to be immediate.

Opponents raised concerns about data-entry errors, effects on employment, and the similarity (or difference) from red-flag laws. Sponsor and supporters said the registry is voluntary and distinct from involuntary red-flag orders. The sponsor also noted that several local pilot programs and some military-base programs offer similar temporary storage options.

Ending: The hearing closed with the sponsor urging members to pass the bill; the transcript records no committee vote at the hearing.","House Bill 737 would let people register a short ‘do-not-sell’ entry to block purchasing firearms during a mental-health crisis and coordinate with a related safe-storage bill. Supporters, including a law professor, said a voluntary cooling-off registry could prevent impulsive suicides; opponents raised implementation and privacy concerns.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":117,"_47":118,"_49":119,"_51":120,"_53":121,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":122,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":123,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6304023,"Heated hearing on bill to limit state ownership of water rights and set a deadline for water court adjudication",1626,7805000,9431000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2469355-649dde3d8d3a0267cd98a3134b98c8da&start=7805&end=9431","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2469355-649dde3d8d3a0267cd98a3134b98c8da/thumbnail_7805000.jpg","/articles/6304023/Montana/Heated-hearing-on-bill-to-limit-state-ownership-of-water-rights-and-set-a-deadline-for-water-court-adjudication","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6304023-48e6bb056f2711293cabf5b3167598b5/orig.mp4?Expires=1770846995&Signature=EN0zmOd8Gkb5dVo9p57jJ94CmqjgaubhouahzzcRuiw6lWUPt1MPvbH4gyFR9tzKfr93Rc7bXkFVRhBwc-QegRxkncqPHrimGGtjRk7RkYd6RVYlDma-EBk2alEkXk7~1~j9zdXiyItyQerEutcjCrCx5CyJsi8t2ZHcXS-tI6EWOEvpYP1vwZY4lXx7QJlNgM5Un9Wk~violQ670skBBVBykYwomEw118C~3rbK62fWjtM0JptE0Knp0hREX5akYeFzgUorrfdJIM4fTIVz-eUKUYcIpvfRgzasKi1w-g~JHSU66OiBwVcS5XmS3wmzpW58~b99riJHv~Y--tPmYg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Brandon Lear and water-rights proponents told the committee HB 676 would protect private water-right holders from having the state claim ownership of a water right if the well and diversion are located on private land even though water is used for an adjacent state trust lease. \"Right now in the state, the land board has the ability to take private water from the water right holder that is being used on state land and make it a state water right. What this bill aims to do is end that,\" Lear said.

Supporters including the Senior Ag Water Rights Alliance, Rocky Mountain Stockgrowers and a lineup of ranchers and leaseholders argued that producers invest in wells, pumps and improvements, and that the state should not appropriate those private investments when water for irrigation is used temporarily on leased state sections. Proponents urged a statutory limit on water-court authority and recommended a fixed sunset date (amendment language discussed that would allow a 2031 cutoff) for the specialized water court, arguing the adjudication was intended to be temporary when established decades ago.

Opponents included Lieutenant Governor Kristin Juras, the Montana Hospital Association (which spoke on fiduciary trust obligations), Trout Unlimited, the Montana Water Resources Association and other irrigation and conservation stakeholders. The lieutenant governor warned the bill could endanger Montana's primacy under the McCarran Amendment because federal claims and Indian water compacts remain unresolved, and she asserted that the state has a fiduciary duty to defend water rights appurtenant to state trust lands for the benefit of public-school trust beneficiaries. Trout Unlimited and others urged maintaining the water court to finish adjudication correctly rather than imposing a hard sunset that could leave unresolved claims and invite relitigation in district courts.

Several county and grazing stakeholders urged faster adjudication and accused the water court of delay, while conservation groups warned the proposal could invite wholesale relitigation of decrees and complicate interstate and tribal compact approvals. The committee heard technical questions about whether water rights are improvements vs. property appurtenant to parcels, compensation formulas for infrastructure and how appeal paths would function if the water court is eliminated.

Ending: The hearing was long and divided; opponents emphasized constitutional and trust-duty issues and asked for more study; the transcript shows the hearing closed without a committee vote recorded.","House Bill 676 would prevent state trust lands from taking ownership of private groundwater rights used on adjacent private land, require sale of certain landlocked trust parcels to lessees, and set a fixed end date for the water court's adjudication process. Proponents argued the bill protects private property and leaseholders; opponents — the","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

House hearing spotlights bipartisan push to require asbestos transparency, limit over-naming in lawsuits

Committee hears bills to extend malpractice and insurance coverage windows for minors harmed by gender-transition care

Committee hearing on bill that would treat parental support for child gender transition as custody factor draws large turnout

Committee hears 'Donna's Law' proposal to let people voluntarily block firearm purchases during mental-health crises

Heated hearing on bill to limit state ownership of water rights and set a deadline for water court adjudication