[{"_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",6246792,"mediaKeyId","3215373-e392dc68709ec5336b7212f7715918a5","parentId",3215373,"title","Bill would require training and redaction for child custody evaluators after parent testimony","audioSeconds",248,"startMs",99000,"endMs",347000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3215373-e392dc68709ec5336b7212f7715918a5&start=99&end=347","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3215373-e392dc68709ec5336b7212f7715918a5/thumbnail_99000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6246792/Texas/Bill-would-require-training-and-redaction-for-child-custody-evaluators-after-parent-testimony","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6246792-fa97e94395b56e9679434a4901ddd8df/orig.mp4?Expires=1770877072&Signature=ZFWc3E9oITHCEkW-S1NGIxxPCv1IBxUeU1Z1k9j8uUetPRXequxUjUHsVgqwAeRt4QCl5HiwHV~Ie~LbmZ7KotOupWflIVOQO12ahozsfX5zlFetdzDwbk81wcvtD8fiodPGsoJzNhG1WXLnOnRI6l60MTHNT2vbqvEDg~XxNmMZ0r3oI~e~uF2Fllowsb1SBd0f8nMyTMaoux6MzB7axkdf-gjpLwr6u8cVEoUCXYlKTMSF45FkqbzptDGzyk4eSveztQubAmRdH2o1UZPyAGRE-eCHD9jFiF0OOT4HbAGUKUaAZyTlhj0NHNAHfFUcRAqLhj6SURercsQFTjYhAQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Texas Legislature","date","2025-05-07T00:00:00Z","article","Senate Committee on Jurisprudence members heard explanation and public testimony on House Bill 2340, which would require people who conduct child custody evaluations to complete recent training on children with intellectual or developmental disabilities and to redact sensitive personal information before records are shared.

The bill, presented to the committee by Senator Judith Zaffirini, would require evaluators to complete, within the prior two years, at least three hours of training related to caring for children with intellectual or developmental disabilities. It would also mandate redaction of sensitive data and would bar courts from admitting evaluations as evidence unless the evaluator met the training requirement.

The measure matters, supporters said, because custody evaluators may recommend placements to a judge and their reports are often relied on in litigation.

Claudia Laird, who testified in favor of the bill, described her family’s experience with a domestic relations office evaluation. \"They then took this information and gave it to the opposing party, which mean they means they gave my minor daughter's birth date and social security number and my social security number to a woman who had plead guilty to theft,\" Laird said.

Laird also said the evaluator who visited her home displayed little familiarity with educating children with intellectual disabilities. She urged the committee to require additional training for evaluators and to require redaction before files are released.

Senator Zaffirini explained the sponsor’s intent: to limit what clerks must transmit and to allow parties to request additional documents if necessary while protecting sensitive personal information.

No witnesses registered opposition; the committee opened and then closed public testimony during the hearing. The bill was left pending.

The committee did not take a vote during the hearing. Further action, including any amendments or scheduling for markup, was not decided at the time the bill was left pending.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Committee on Jurisprudence May 7, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Senate Committee on Jurisprudence members heard explanation and public testimony on House Bill 2340, which would require people who conduct child custody evaluations to complete recent training on children with intellectual or developmental disabilities and to redact sensitive personal information before records are shared.","taxTitle","Committee on Jurisprudence, Senate, Legislative, Texas","taxId",16926,"location","Texas","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},6246776,"Committee reviews bill to refine Texas business courts, add judges and clarify jurisdiction",1995,1829000,3824000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3215373-e392dc68709ec5336b7212f7715918a5&start=1829&end=3824","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3215373-e392dc68709ec5336b7212f7715918a5/thumbnail_1829000.jpg","/articles/6246776/Texas/Committee-reviews-bill-to-refine-Texas-business-courts-add-judges-and-clarify-jurisdiction","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6246776-33d796d2538a20c9a336177a828404d6/orig.mp4?Expires=1770877072&Signature=KQUfrfD0wEEq8dtYI5nCWORgkBjgazWGFztRBJsriWnM6Dn4gNoQH~VyOOE8RELxLKIpBMc1cLcI9eKz3qLl78CZ78kDeWZXfAwPUNcI8AHRzb8WhGa8wlavLWZhlxc2DJYxA0-KdHLR6hQbMTcoyWhjTDXwrqd11Qt5PdlngNnAxLtR6Ds-QN2a5K0ErPHZ~rj6awWYCs5NpzCF-k2aMf~hmyLECGfjjrxmmXTsqsjpgYwbQGaOzwkoWrgbdHKzk3Ye867sGJQoYbZMqOSyK8~TjEKtDKsizhq0R0Y-I2L3X859VvfUfSpce6vpnSWVJyfySbxenm7jlDggdOY80g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Committee on Jurisprudence took testimony on Senate Bill 2883, a committee substitute that would refine the operation, jurisdiction and resources of Texas business courts established last session.

Senator Hughes, presenting the committee substitute, said the changes build on House Bill 19 and would not expand the business-court footprint into rural counties. The substitute lowers the amount-in-controversy threshold for certain transactions and commercial disputes from $10 million to $5 million, adds specific judges in high-demand divisions, clarifies integration with multi-district litigation and visiting-judge programs, and directs the Texas Supreme Court to adopt rules for prompt jurisdictional determinations.

Mike Tankersley of the Texas Business Law Foundation described the proposal as incremental refinements and said the bill proposes one additional judge for a Dallas division and one for a Houston division. \"The bill proposes 1 additional judge for Dallas, the first division, 1 additional judge for Houston, the eleventh division,\" Tankersley said.

Patrick Sweeten, a judge in the business-court third division, said the courts are operational and that filings have come in at a brisk pace. \"We have 118 cases now in the business court. I think there are 82 active cases,\" Sweeten told the committee, and said roughly 46% of filings have been in Harris County and about 30% in Dallas County.

The committee substitute also addresses salary treatment: it would set a business-court judge’s state-paid salary equal to a district court judge’s salary plus the maximum county supplement, so state funding would cover the supplement amount in counties that do not provide it.

Witnesses said the substitute also clarifies that consumer and product-liability matters remain excluded from business-court jurisdiction and that the measure attempts to align practice lists across statutes so business courts are integrated into the judicial system.

Committee members asked whether the changes would flood the courts; stakeholders said the change is intended to be incremental and to resolve practical jurisdictional questions that have arisen in the courts’ first months. The committee opened testimony from several stakeholders and left the bill pending while the House and Senate coordinate language.","Senate Bill 2883 would make multiple adjustments to Texas business courts created by House Bill 19, including lowering a monetary threshold for certain disputes to $5 million, adding judges in high-volume divisions, integrating business courts into multi-district and other programs, and equalizing salary treatment.",{"_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},6246781,"Lawmakers consider rules to address court reporter shortage and digital-recording standards",979,832000,1811000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3215373-e392dc68709ec5336b7212f7715918a5&start=832&end=1811","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3215373-e392dc68709ec5336b7212f7715918a5/thumbnail_832000.jpg","/articles/6246781/Texas/Lawmakers-consider-rules-to-address-court-reporter-shortage-and-digital-recording-standards","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6246781-ed8d98745ce8d7f2e7d4f52d3a99d407/orig.mp4?Expires=1770877072&Signature=TitFOrSsz36Dym5-UJL9XmfqcPrrOh-hyULv2D44S5exVuaY~nLlZPs6O-XW-4tuItctZYJNy6bicEAUrOjmqki6snPX2jbIF~eJLbWdGPrk-KD~SeA4H3vv7uFf2J77LWBlQjMGVVPdk74yoxAOOzW6JYd0vqfoSNSSd6nhhZ1ApGPzXSP7butuS-VzKkwIv-WyG4ewbRMPaeL5vSp7eKCtASX8hDHRGOmvNCdz-8oBTZWLFj1SuvYfqd5YATRMHnD33XPo2mEbqML4~g8IG~4i9gSaebvyN4qKrP~6MS4xbI5QZG79c2SbpBoqAlB8ICjZ4~M51LkuTycQy5Ialw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Committee on Jurisprudence heard discussion and proponent testimony on Senate Bill 1538, a Texas Judicial Council recommendation that would establish registration and regulatory frameworks for court reporters and set conditions under which a court may use a digital recorder instead of a certified shorthand reporter.

Senator Judith Zaffirini presented the measure, telling members the bill responds to a shortage of court reporters driven by retirements, fewer new entrants, and other pressures that have produced transcription delays and case backlogs.

Steve Bresnan, representing the Texas Court Reporters Association, said his group wants to focus first on maintaining and supporting official court reporters who serve in courtrooms. \"We have focused on the official court reporter side,\" Bresnan told the committee, and recommended a registry approach rather than a broad regulatory sweep.

Ronald Morgan, director of the Judicial Branch Certification Commission, told the committee the shortage is concentrated in particular courts and geographic areas. \"There are over 2,000 court reporters registered with the commission right now. There are nearly a thousand courts of record in the state,\" Morgan said, and explained that although courts may use digital recording technology, gaps remain because appellate courts typically require a transcript rather than only audio.

The bill as discussed would allow more use of digital recorders under conditions that include a code of ethics and set qualifications; it also contemplates a committee substitute being negotiated among the Judicial Branch Certification Commission, the Office of Court Administration, and the Texas Court Reporters Association.

Committee members questioned how courts choose digital recording, who pays for reporters, and whether parties can insist on a reporter at hearings. Witnesses said practices vary by county and by local arrangements; witnesses noted rules previously changed to allow courts to file a notice to use digital recording rather than seek prior Supreme Court permission.

Public testimony was opened and then closed; the bill was left pending for further work on a committee substitute.","Senate Bill 1538, backed by the Texas Judicial Council and other stakeholders, would register and set qualifications for court reporters and define when courts may rely on digital recorders; proponents said the measure aims to address a shortage of court reporters and to set ethics and technical standards for digital recording.",{"_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},6246787,"Committee hears proposal to expand who can sue over child custody to fourth-degree relatives",372,448000,820000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3215373-e392dc68709ec5336b7212f7715918a5&start=448&end=820","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3215373-e392dc68709ec5336b7212f7715918a5/thumbnail_448000.jpg","/articles/6246787/Texas/Committee-hears-proposal-to-expand-who-can-sue-over-child-custody-to-fourth-degree-relatives","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6246787-60403ea21a3259480f86e64b48feb3a9/orig.mp4?Expires=1770877072&Signature=Pmc6LwWdcheugbx5qcODMrw2nG~yPtxLnlI0MrGE49p01SEcq9or1f6li0wyRoveZ1FvoY37r1H4w8F5MjOv~~C8TBROKQ~Pxg72Ii4iAJpSDSXBimsncetZCCjhSQTJBesf8mesK4RXmGhZLWO94eSGnXR~85jv8Nt7p5gYop3uu49gsD0HjBfuLSj1otRGQn6K5ted~FSlwg3~kElBj16R1PqR9TaxdSNGOZSQ1~cEUqcfDB7yvtIzX3~sy--AGf3AdnY-wOjmgcy7wflaKE~ckk3f5O0Ogd0HJOW6F~h-jTIvlNHOIk1pACCKFfQYDcvqJKoD9zXlMPLQ2bVQoQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Committee on Jurisprudence received an explanation and proponent testimony on House Bill 2350, which would expand and clarify who has legal standing to file suits affecting the parent-child relationship.

Senator Johnson, who explained the measure to the committee, said the bill would expand standing for certain relatives to the fourth degree of consanguinity, refine criteria for foster and kinship caregivers, and remove standing for nonrelatives based solely on past contact unless specific conditions are met.

Celia Wood, a regular testifier on family-law issues, told the committee she supports the proposal and said broadening standing appropriately limits litigation that she said can unnecessarily traumatize children. \"Being dragged through a lawsuit where the... petitioner cannot possibly win in the end if the law is followed helps no one,\" Wood said.

Julia Hatcher, president of the Texas Association of Family Defense Attorneys, also testified in support and noted the Legislature previously directed Child Protective Services to notify relatives within the fourth degree of consanguinity when removing a child; she urged consistency throughout the code. Hatcher cited past litigation in which a nonrelative was able to get into a custody case under current law and noted the legal and financial toll on parents.

Witnesses told the committee the bill had passed unanimously in the House and had no organized opposition in committee. The committee opened and closed public testimony during the hearing and left the bill pending.

No committee vote or amendment was taken during the hearing. Further scheduling, including any committee substitute or floor action, was not decided at that time.","House Bill 2350 would expand legal standing in suits affecting the parent-child relationship to relatives through the fourth degree of consanguinity and refine foster/kinship parent rights; testimony from legal experts urged swift passage.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Bill would require training and redaction for child custody evaluators after parent testimony

Committee reviews bill to refine Texas business courts, add judges and clarify jurisdiction

Lawmakers consider rules to address court reporter shortage and digital-recording standards

Committee hears proposal to expand who can sue over child custody to fourth-degree relatives