[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-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],{"_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",6278715,"mediaKeyId","2636732-27776c6c6cb9c08f48a5da2d733be610","parentId",2636732,"title","Committee hears memorial asking state Supreme Court to reinstate and expand limited license legal technicians","audioSeconds",669,"startMs",1923000,"endMs",2592000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2636732-27776c6c6cb9c08f48a5da2d733be610&start=1923&end=2592","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2636732-27776c6c6cb9c08f48a5da2d733be610/thumbnail_1923000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6278715/Washington/Committee-hears-memorial-asking-state-Supreme-Court-to-reinstate-and-expand-limited-license-legal-technicians","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6278715-7811e830293f439477c8cd59528ee5ac/orig.mp4?Expires=1770445337&Signature=LHMLOf6TlTWbtYW~ptm5eaULAW5SImLo7rS86Vmx1zxcKfgkPAGQZ5CGRoWh7uCftDdpMTwhotkDZK2Y0OJBlxUqdDh3Qv0lcxi6Eg3J5facUL0OOAapPJa~AbLlILxucJDxOx6Y3SuYzZhGJFnI9HlkzpFxiz89rsk3a34se2sInMFvb9hQFrFcTuaUCou8PQLkhKF6~t9C4ksDcq-gUUeGG2GKuz99Xipxr~C8a7VQ9a~p742IwLwAJaQY5mZjmmHbHKuGQesYtbAFLgP2e40sNOZCq8HR5ybZagVPzg8cbF~OPVSWHQof5-D9OvQqc~1i13pYGO1YmaLwrcwiAw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Washington Legislature","date","2025-03-14T00:00:00Z","article","The House Civil Rights & Judiciary Committee took testimony on Senate Joint Memorial 8006 on March 14, asking the Washington Supreme Court to reverse its prior decision to sunset the limited license legal technician (LLLT) program and to consider expanding the program’s scope.

Committee staff summarized that the memorial requests the court to: (1) reinstate LLLT license issuance; (2) within one year expand the LLLT program to authorize assistance at administrative hearings and to provide eviction and debt assistance; and (3) convene a work group to consider authorization for LLLTs to assist defendants charged with offenses in courts of limited jurisdiction and deliver recommendations within two years.

Senator Nikki Torres, which she identified as representing the 15th Legislative District, said the memorial responds to access‑to‑justice shortfalls and the shortage of attorneys, particularly in eviction and debt matters. “Most people can't afford an attorney to help with those hearings,” she said, and described the memorial as a request for the Supreme Court to reconsider the program’s sunset and the scope of practice.

Several LLLTs and advocates testified in support. Michael Begley, who completed the LLLT curriculum but did not finalize licensing, described pro se litigants’ needs in family law and urged restoring and expanding the program. Alicia DeGan (LLLT No. 131) described operating a legal technician practice and assisting more than 1,200 pro se litigants, and urged broader program support and tech‑enabled court processes to reduce costs.

Committee members asked about cost and sustainability; members noted the Supreme Court previously cited high per‑license issuance costs in choosing to sunset the program. Senator Torres and witnesses said the memorial envisions education partnerships such as community colleges to reduce cost and asked a work group to address financial and regulatory safeguards.

No vote or formal action occurred. Advocates urged the committee to pass the memorial to prompt the Supreme Court to review program restoration and expansion; opponents and questions about affordability and scope were recorded in testimony.

Ending: Proponents said reinstating and expanding LLLTs could increase access to justice for eviction, debt, and family law matters; the memorial asks the Supreme Court to study options and report back.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Civil Rights & Judiciary Committee. March 14, 2025 Time: 10:30 AM","oneSentenceSummary","A memorial asking the Washington Supreme Court to revive and expand the limited license legal technician (LLLT) program was heard by the House Civil Rights & Judiciary Committee on March 14.","taxTitle","Civil Rights & Judiciary, House of Representatives, Legislative Sessions, Washington","taxId",20256,"location","Washington","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},6278719,"Committee hears updates to Washington Business Corporations Act including committees of one",952,559000,1511000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2636732-27776c6c6cb9c08f48a5da2d733be610&start=559&end=1511","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2636732-27776c6c6cb9c08f48a5da2d733be610/thumbnail_559000.jpg","/articles/6278719/Washington/Committee-hears-updates-to-Washington-Business-Corporations-Act-including-committees-of-one","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6278719-f1807f13040f19eb4dbceff3535d5ea0/orig.mp4?Expires=1770445337&Signature=YYl4TzNYxKMndH6e8G~9kUNJ9dbkI0~vGNh8Rxsn-8mlDWlhtqewX0fQUSswqgzsiVeCp8qhjAwGmAgSEiyTvI5aNsI2qLQ6aj~18X0vSGYrVJi2td5ZfxOZyF3LWeKoOb95-JLh37itIrKK43~P8CP96VkIB3tMOS~hW1Ap8HrJQElb9neGXlugm-s38tbiQ05fvaDu5raLx2O-WGtAtvpdhwngZrz7qHyCWaA4pAOquSykjItCd6Q8cJAW52y-~1KEW6CICFMpNPqz~2euPJbV4LTEKmuQg~aXZWMoa4Gp2-SAVDBWaLvD0S8jZ2nDJu2EaPpoFC3PqqcOEHQZDA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Civil Rights & Judiciary Committee heard Senate Bill 5,006 on March 14, a statutory cleanup and modernization package that would revise multiple provisions of the Washington Business Corporations Act.

Committee staff explained the bill incorporates recommendations from the Corporate Act Revision Committee of the Washington State Bar and makes changes across several topics: committees of the board of directors, share options, share exchanges, dissenter’s rights, and the voting threshold for voluntary dissolution for new corporations.

Staff explained the bill would allow a board committee to be composed of one or more directors, remove several statutory prohibitions on committee authority, and permit the appointment of alternate committee members to replace absent or disqualified members. The bill also would clarify that rights/options/warrants may be issued for “other securities” of the corporation, clarify who is entitled to rights in a share exchange, add conversion to the list of transactions that trigger dissenter’s rights, and lower the default shareholder approval threshold for voluntary dissolution for corporations formed after 08/01/2024 to a majority unless the articles/bylaws specify a greater vote.

Senator Jamie Peterson, prime sponsor, told the committee the changes are largely technical updates recommended by the CARC and intended to keep Washington corporate law competitive with national reforms and with the Model Business Corporations Act. “The headline change in this bill is the change to allow committees of one,” Peterson said, adding the change addresses situations when only a single disinterested director may serve on a committee.

Michael Hutchings, chair of the Corporate Act Revision Committee, described the committee’s work and said the update is intended to keep Washington’s statute current with developments in Delaware and the ABA model act while tailoring changes to local needs.

Committee members asked about the dissolution threshold change and whether the bill is a cleanup of last session’s amendments. Hutchings and Peterson said last year’s code revision changed many thresholds to majority but omitted voluntary dissolution; this bill completes that change for corporations formed after the stated effective date while grandfathering older corporations.

No formal action or vote occurred at the hearing; staff and proponents indicated a work session would be useful to address implementation details.

Ending: Sponsors said the bill is technical and intended to aid Washington businesses and corporate governance practice; the committee may schedule a work session for further review.","Senate Bill 5,006 would amend the Washington Business Corporations Act to permit board committees composed of one director, expand share option language, add dissenter's rights for corporate conversion, and lower voting thresholds for voluntary dissolution for corporations formed after 08/01/2024.",{"_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},6278724,"Committee hears bill to require state notice of federal HSR merger filings",3278,22000,3300000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2636732-27776c6c6cb9c08f48a5da2d733be610&start=22&end=3300","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2636732-27776c6c6cb9c08f48a5da2d733be610/thumbnail_22000.jpg","/articles/6278724/Washington/Committee-hears-bill-to-require-state-notice-of-federal-HSR-merger-filings","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6278724-3b9909c54bb30d405b85a277e3edd1af/orig.mp4?Expires=1770445337&Signature=R8dTqnhXds5AoCbKb6JtN-nEHNS4lgYxfbwddB1inlnArNMoczyWzHhPLG80LJO1BSxPKgzfwxaFjWOmMgfKnUoXy7AeLuKUiNIXMSvkvKrOKHo8oHBEAD0bK61i30FUAbnOxLgQ-8uxJLqEELPYJnE9Mq6X6ACYWIuzYcC5eccxkLBTYnPYmsXv5y2sIpbXIuZkA0sB98GyO5Nexfgrl6AYOhluxnOH2O7JlxUZtzcWMx0mZPb8LPHGbIQjVdDhyU5o-0bzpYJ9jyoY8TOowUEpRCcc-5QHgFcblsgnMvrovr0-VXhqsZz7~Z4u0AFjP21FGMqxaxcTIp1h6TuSIA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A bill that would give Washington’s attorney general earlier access to federal Hart‑Scott‑Rodino merger filings drew support at a March 14 hearing of the House Civil Rights & Judiciary Committee.

House staff told the committee that Senate Bill 5,122 would require a person who files an HSR pre‑merger notification with the United States under the Hart‑Scott‑Rodino Act to make a contemporaneous filing with the Washington attorney general if the filer: (1) has its principal place of business in Washington; (2) or the filer or a controlling person has annual net Washington sales of the goods or services involved of at least 20% at the HSR filing threshold; or (3) the filer is a health‑care provider or provider organization conducting business in Washington. The bill prohibits charging a fee for the state filing, creates confidentiality protections, and allows disclosure only in administrative or judicial proceedings subject to protective orders.

The bill’s prime sponsor, Senator Yasmine Trudeau, told the committee the measure is a uniform law drafted by the Uniform Law Commission and is not an attorney‑general initiative. “Having parties file these HSR forms concurrently with the attorney general would ensure timely review, promote efficiencies by encouraging states to share resources, and is frankly a better use of taxpayer dollars,” she said.

Travis Kennedy, managing assistant attorney general in the Antitrust Division, testified the attorney general’s office supports the bill because it helps the office learn about large transactions earlier and coordinate with federal enforcers. “SB 51 22 would enable us to become involved earlier in the process and ultimately provide clarity to the merging parties,” Kennedy said.

Caitlin Wolf of the Uniform Law Commission described the drafting process as balanced and noted the bill imposes no additional filing fee; the federal HSR filing schedule would remain the operative timeline for parties.

Committee members asked whether the state filing would duplicate federal filings and whether the materials are already available to the attorney general; staff and supporters said the materials are available to federal enforcers but not always to the state and that the bill addresses that notification gap. The attorney general may seek civil penalties up to $10,000 per day for noncompliance, subject to procedural protections.

No formal action or vote was taken; the item was heard in committee and testimony recorded.

Ending: Committee staff and proponents said the bill is intended as an administrative coordination tool rather than a substantive expansion of antitrust authority; the committee will consider next steps following the hearing.","House Civil Rights & Judiciary Committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 5122, which would require parties that file Hart‑Scott‑Rodino pre‑merger notifications with federal agencies to contemporaneously file the same materials with the Washington Attorney General under specified nexus tests.",{"_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},6278708,"Committee hears bill to remove coroner jurisdiction and repeal 'concealing birth' statute",459,3568000,4027000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2636732-27776c6c6cb9c08f48a5da2d733be610&start=3568&end=4027","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2636732-27776c6c6cb9c08f48a5da2d733be610/thumbnail_3568000.jpg","/articles/6278708/Washington/Committee-hears-bill-to-remove-coroner-jurisdiction-and-repeal-concealing-birth-statute","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6278708-933105f0769101facdd74d7c5d3a558a/orig.mp4?Expires=1770445337&Signature=o6mFR6~-OInWdnCVibERcv-B7vM2FS7zx5py5yNb9nTVAeKXzhwGcS7g5Ku6YT8z4dAcAfb~EwyyuwZi2XVWr9ntnCBpc3b9V-f-unvCSuXciT~nUzKdomTywWzzFWqnm690J4ClNLh~4RfrPyILKMWXdQGqEBHln-ViEJs7l5vRnJDkCI9eQCXhk4zcYposcnVHXvl5Wl-4OXWpbf3WXP-cI0ofNqY~KgU3PxWWxuNXWWWpGOVN-15EATKdT8IHfRSE0o7zX9gY3wE4DlROYQPPHiubgLo~HSJUfAYjEuVDBVvXf3xnFG1eF6CG3bFu4XkvMzLlofG8N98UTHMleg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Lawmakers considered Substitute Senate Bill 15‑93 on March 14, a measure proponents called the “Dignity in Pregnancy Loss” Act that would repeal an antiquated criminal statute and remove automatic coroner jurisdiction over some pregnancy‑related deaths.

Committee staff summarized the bill’s three main provisions: repeal the criminal offense of concealing birth (historically enacted in 1909); remove county coroners’ and medical examiners’ automatic jurisdiction over bodies of persons whose death resulted from a known or suspected abortion or from premature birth or stillbirth; and require correctional institutions and private detention facilities to report annually to the Department of Health on aggregate counts of miscarriage, stillbirth, or perinatal loss while incarcerated, with the Department reporting to the Legislature by June 30, 2027.

Senator Manka Dhingra, the bill’s sponsor, said the measure aims to avoid the criminalization of people who suffer pregnancy loss and to eliminate statutes inconsistent with Washington law. “This is simply about making sure that things that are protected in the state of Washington continue to be protected,” she said, adding that coroners would retain jurisdiction where deaths involve unlawful or suspicious circumstances.

Medical, survivors’ advocacy, reproductive‑rights and immigrant‑advocacy witnesses testified in favor. Sarah Ainsworth of If/When/How said the bill removes language that misstates routine practice; she said medical certifiers and hospitals routinely handle stillbirths and neonatal autopsies, and the coroner statute should not create a default criminal investigation path. Survivors’ advocates and domestic‑violence organizations said the existing language can be weaponized against survivors and communities of color and could deter people from seeking care.

Opponents voiced concerns that repeal could reduce investigative capacity in some infant‑death cases or limit information available to grieving families. Theresa Schremp, a retired attorney, said coroners should retain authority to investigate maternal deaths and cases where criminal activity may be implicated. Mary Long of Conservative Ladies of Washington urged more precise statutory definitions, especially for the term “perinatal,” and cautioned against eliminating an investigative tool.

Committee members asked whether the repeal would prevent medical autopsies ordered by hospitals; staff and witnesses clarified that hospitals routinely perform medical examinations and that the bill removes the coroner’s automatic jurisdiction but does not strip investigators of authority when suspicion of wrongdoing exists. The sponsor said the bill is not intended to impede criminal investigations where probable cause exists.

No committee vote was taken. Supporters asked legislators to pass the bill to ensure people who experience miscarriages, stillbirths or other pregnancy losses are treated with dignity and are not automatically subject to criminal investigation.

Ending: Supporters framed the bill as aligning statutes with current medical practice and protecting vulnerable people from criminal investigation after pregnancy loss; opponents asked for clearer definitions and assurances that criminal investigations and public‑health inquiries remain available when warranted.","Substitute Senate Bill 15‑93 would repeal a 1909 crime of concealing a birth, remove automatic coroner/medical examiner jurisdiction over deaths resulting from abortion, stillbirth, or premature birth, and require annual reporting from correctional facilities on pregnancy loss; sponsors said the changes are intended to prevent criminalization of孕","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee hears memorial asking state Supreme Court to reinstate and expand limited license legal technicians

Committee hears updates to Washington Business Corporations Act including committees of one

Committee hears bill to require state notice of federal HSR merger filings

Committee hears bill to remove coroner jurisdiction and repeal 'concealing birth' statute