House Bill 125, titled in committee as the "Louisiana Genomic Security Act of 2025," drew an extended hearing on Monday as lawmakers weighed national-security warnings from outside experts against concerns from medical and research stakeholders about costs and the impact on scientific work.

Representative Ed Horton, the bill’s author, said the measure would "safeguard individuals' genomic information from access by foreign adversaries" by defining covered technologies, limiting remote access and prescribing penalties for unauthorized uses. Horton asked the committee to consider amendments under development with health-care stakeholders.

Experts who testified in favor framed the bill as a national-security necessity. Michael Lucci, founder of State Armour, told the committee "the threat in this case ... is the Communist Party of China," and argued that companies tied to the Chinese state can be compelled under Chinese law to turn over data. He told the committee the People's Republic of China's 2017 national intelligence law requires companies to provide data on request and cited public concerns that certain Chinese-linked genomics firms were building large gene banks and discussing biological targeting strategies.

Jackie Deal, who has researched the Chinese military build-up, said federal entities including the Department of Defense and Department of Commerce have already acted against Beijing Genomics Institute (BGI) and that federal reports, such as a National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology final report and a recent Government Accountability Office review, raise related questions about supply chains and federally funded research. "The federal government is acting," Deal said, "but even if the Defense Department puts BGI on a no-go list for the Pentagon, hospitals and other health-care providers can still use their services unless states act."

Committee members pressed the bill's author and witnesses on several fronts. Representative Domingue said she was concerned the bill could be read to tell medical research institutions how to conduct research, and she asked whether the bill would impede scientific work by restricting certain sequencers or software. Representative Jordan and others asked about costs and implementation timelines; witnesses and the sponsor acknowledged sequencing machines can range from roughly $100,000 to $1 million and said amendments were being drafted to make the law prospective (applying to new acquisitions) and not retroactive.

Proponents said the bill was being coordinated with hospitals and research centers; the author said the Louisiana Hospital Association was working with her on amendments. The committee also heard that similar measures have been introduced or passed in other states, including Idaho, Tennessee, Kansas, Montana, Arizona and Utah; the sponsor cited activity in Texas and Nebraska as well.

After extended questioning and technical discussion, Representative Horton and committee members agreed to continue negotiations with the hospital association and research stakeholders. The bill was temporarily passed over to allow the author to return with revised amendments for committee consideration.

Why it matters: The bill sits at the intersection of public-health research, national security and procurement rules. Sequencing machines and analysis software underpin genomic research and clinical testing; restrictions could affect hospitals, university labs and federally funded research programs.

Next steps: The author will work with hospitals and research institutions to refine amendments; the committee placed HB 125 in temporary passover and will revisit it when the sponsor returns with the negotiated amendment set.