Alabama House and Senate clash over local legislation as session nears end
Senate Minority Leader Bobby Singleton, D-Greensboro (left) looks at the phone of Senate President Pro Tem Garlan Gudger, R-Cullman, on the floor of the Alabama Senate on May 7, 2025 at the Alabama Statehouse in Montgomery, Alabama. The Senate saw two filibusters on Wednesday: one from Sen. Rodger Smitherman, D-Birmingham that would have allowed the governor to appoint members of the governing board of the Alabama Department of Archives and History without Senate confirmation; the other from Singleton in protest of the House not taking up a bill he considered important for his district.
The Alabama Legislature ground to a halt on Wednesday afternoon amid a dispute between the Alabama House and a senator over a gambling bill for Greene County.
The stand-off on the next-to-last legislative day of the session punctuated a tense day in the chambers that saw another filibuster on a bill that would change the governance of the Alabama Department of Archives and History and two Republican representatives getting into a shouting match on the House floor.
'The question about ending it today was the right decision, I believe, so that everyone stopped, we had a clean break, and then we're going into the last legislative day, knowing exactly what's in front of us,' said President Pro Tempore Garlan Gudger, R-Cullman, after the Senate adjourned, adding that cloturing the Democratic filibuster would 'create a little bit of animosity towards each side of the aisle, and we don't want that.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
The disputes left the fates of high-profile legislation and dozens of local bills for individual districts up in the air. The last day of the session is May 14.
'[Next week] looks slow because I'm settled in They've got 40 more House bills,' said Senate Minority Leader Bobby Singleton, D-Greensboro, who filibustered a Senate calendar for most of the afternoon. 'I'm willing to talk 40 more hours.'
Singleton wanted the House to pass a SB 90, a bill for Greene County that would update the distribution of local gambling revenue in the county and change the appointing authority for Greene County Racing Commission members from the governor to the legislative delegation.
Wednesday was the last day for lawmakers to get bills to the governor's desk before Gov. Kay Ivey can wield a pocket veto over legislation. Singleton said Ivey's staff said she wasn't going to sign his bill, and that a Senate agenda of 10 bills taken up by the chamber on Wednesday 'needed to get out' because 'she's not going to sign the bills.'
'The governor has said to leadership that there were certain bills that she was not going to sign … That's why you saw all those bills because they needed to get out today, so that therefore they could override the veto on the last day if she decided to veto them,' Singleton said.
Gina Maiola, a spokesperson for the governor, wrote in a text message Wednesday 'that's not necessarily true regarding issues with local bills,' saying that the governor met with leadership to discuss the final days of the session and agree to a final schedule.
Singleton filibustered the local calendar but allowed the first five local bills on it to pass.
The House did not put Singleton's bill on a calendar on Wednesday, likely dooming it for the session. In the House, Rep. Curtis Travis, D-Tuscaloosa, requested to bring SB 90 to the floor out of order, a move that requires four-fifths of members present to approve. After an hour and 45 minutes of debate, Travis withdrew the motion.
House Speaker Nathaniel Ledbetter, R-Rainsville, said after the House adjourned that all gaming bills must be brought to the floor on a special order calendar, regardless if they are local legislation or statewide bills.
'(Singleton) was really adamant about getting on the floor, and gave a chance for Rep. Travis to have a conversation about it,' Ledbetter said after the House adjourned. 'And I think that's what he wanted to do. And unfortunately, our rules and rules in the Senate aren't the same. And anything that's got to do with gaming in the House, it's got to be general and going to the House floor.'
Rep. Andy Whitt, R-Harvest, who co-sponsored a comprehensive gambling package last year, supported the motion saying Alabamians gamble anyway.
'I do feel that we failed our citizens last year by not voting on a comprehensive gaming package,' Whitt said. 'This is a great demonstration of what happens when we let this patchwork gaming happen all across the state, and it will continue to happen. If you don't think gambling and gaming is happening in your communities, you're all wrong.'
The House had its own internal drama Wednesday when Reps. David Faulkner, R-Mountain Brook, and Matt Simpson, R-Daphne, had a heated discussion on the House floor over an amendment to SB 82, sponsored by Sen. Arthur Orr, R-Decatur.
The bill requires municipal court magistrates and circuit court clerks to annually audit and recall outstanding warrants for Class B and Class C misdemeanors and violations that have not been served within 10 years.
Faulkner's amendment allowed the presiding judge to decide if a warrant would be recalled. Simpson asked Faulkner to change his amendment to also alert the prosecuting attorney.
'We're not amending the amendment,' Faulkner said. 'You can amend the bill.'
Simpson argued Faulkner could not do that.
'I can have this debate with you right now because I'm asking to amend the amendment,' Simpson said. 'Let's let the body ask to amend the amendment.'
The pair got heated, then the bill was carried over to the call of the chair. The pair continued their debate away from the podiums on the House floor, then moved to a side room for about an hour.
They emerged, but the bill was not brought back up.
Both chambers of the Legislature will return on Wednesday afternoon, but the battle between the chambers may not ease. Ledbetter said Singleton's bill will not be on the calendar when the House returns.
But Singleton said after the Senate adjourned that he still wants his bill passed 'like all other local bills.' The Senate minority leader noted the Senate still had to pass about 50 local bills and approve confirmations, and warned that he was willing to filibuster most if not all of them.
'That's where we will be. If that's what game they want to play, I'm willing to play, and I think most of you know that I can play that game,' Singleton said. 'We probably have another 25 confirmations out there. Somebody's not going to get confirmed, and some local bills will die.'
The impasse could also threaten high-profile state bills, including a bill broadening police immunity that Ivey called for in her State of the State address in February. A bill to change the governance of the Alabama Department of Archives and History also stalled after Sen. Rodger Smitherman, D-Birmingham, objected to the bill removing Senate confirmation of board members. The bill will go to a conference committee.
'As of right now, the local legislation is my main priority because all politics is local. We want to make sure that we try to take care of our members here and the members in the House,' Gudger said after the Senate adjourned Wednesday.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
43 minutes ago
Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown
As President Donald Trump's administration targets states and local governments for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities, lawmakers in some Democratic-led states are intensifying their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting such cooperation. In California alone, more than a dozen pro-immigrant bills passed either the Assembly or Senate this week, including one prohibiting schools from allowing federal immigration officials into nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant. Other state measures have sought to protect immigrants in housing, employment and police encounters, even as Trump's administration has ramped up arrests as part of his plan for mass deportations. In Connecticut, legislation pending before Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont would expand a law that already limits when law enforcement officers can cooperate with federal requests to detain immigrants. Among other things, it would let 'any aggrieved person' sue municipalities for alleged violations of the state's Trust Act. Two days after lawmakers gave final approval to the measure, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security included Connecticut on a list of hundreds of 'sanctuary jurisdictions' obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. Since taking office in January, Trump has enlisted hundreds of state and local law enforcement agencies to help identify immigrants in the U.S. illegally and detain them for potential deportation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement now lists 640 such cooperative agreements, a nearly fivefold increase under Trump. Trump also has lifted longtime rules restricting immigration enforcement near schools, churches and hospitals, and ordered federal prosecutors to investigate state or local officials believed to be interfering with his crackdown on illegal immigration. The Department of Justice sued Colorado, Illinois and New York, as well as several cities in those states and New Jersey, alleging their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Just three weeks after Colorado was sued, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed a wide-ranging law expanding the state's protections for immigrants. Among other things, it bars jails from delaying the release of inmates for immigration enforcement and allows penalties of up to $50,000 for public schools, colleges, libraries, child care centers and health care facilities that collect information about people's immigration status, with some exceptions. Polis rejected the administration's description of Colorado as a 'sanctuary state,' asserting that law officers remain 'deeply committed' to working with federal authorities on criminal investigations. 'But to be clear, state and local law enforcement cannot be commandeered to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' Polis said in a bill-signing statement. Illinois also has continued to press pro-immigrant legislation. A bill recently given final approval says no child can be denied a free public education because of immigration status — something already guaranteed nationwide under a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision. Supporters say the state legislation provides a backstop in case court precedent is overturned. The bill also requires schools to develop policies on handling requests from federal immigration officials and allows lawsuits for alleged violations of the measure. Democratic-led states are pursuing a wide range of means to protect immigrants. A new Oregon law bars landlords from inquiring about the immigration status of tenants or applicants. New laws in Washington declare it unprofessional conduct for bail bond agents to enforce civil immigration warrants, prohibit employers from using immigration status to threaten workers and let employees use paid sick leave to attend immigration proceedings for themselves or family members. Vermont last month repealed a state law that let law enforcement agencies enter into immigration enforcement agreements with federal authorities during state or national emergencies. They now need special permission from the governor to do so. As passed by the House, Maryland legislation also would have barred local governments from reaching immigration enforcement agreements with the federal government. That provision was removed in the Senate following pushback from some of the seven Maryland counties that currently have agreements. The final version, which took effect as law at the start of June, forbids public schools and libraries from granting federal immigration authorities access to nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant or 'exigent circumstances.' Maryland Del. Nicole Williams said residents' concerns about Trump's immigration policies prompted her to sponsor the legislation. 'We believe that diversity is our strength, and our role as elected officials is to make sure that all of the residents within our community — regardless of their background — feel safe and comfortable,' Williams said. Though legislation advancing in Democratic states may shield against Trump's policies, 'I would say it's more so to send a message to immigrant communities to let them know that they are welcome,' said Juan Avilez, a policy associate at the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit advocacy group. In California, a law that took effect in 2018 already requires public schools to adopt policies 'limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible.' Some schools have readily applied the law. When DHS officers attempted a welfare check on migrant children at two Los Angeles elementary schools in April, they were denied access by both principals. Legislation passed by the state Senate would reinforce such policies by specifically requiring a judicial warrant for public schools to let immigration authorities into nonpublic areas, allow students to be questioned or disclose information about students and their families. 'Having ICE in our schools means that you'll have parents who will not want to send their kids to school at all,' Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener said in support of the bill. But some Republicans said the measure was 'injecting partisan immigration policies' into schools. 'We have yet to see a case in California where we have scary people in masks entering schools and ripping children away,' said state Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil. 'Let's stop these fear tactics that do us an injustice.'
Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown
As President Donald Trump's administration targets states and local governments for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities, lawmakers in some Democratic-led states are intensifying their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting such cooperation. In California alone, more than a dozen pro-immigrant bills passed either the Assembly or Senate this week, including one prohibiting schools from allowing federal immigration officials into nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant. Other state measures have sought to protect immigrants in housing, employment and police encounters, even as Trump's administration has ramped up arrests as part of his plan for mass deportations. In Connecticut, legislation pending before Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont would expand a law that already limits when law enforcement officers can cooperate with federal requests to detain immigrants. Among other things, it would let 'any aggrieved person' sue municipalities for alleged violations of the state's Trust Act. Two days after lawmakers gave final approval to the measure, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security included Connecticut on a list of hundreds of 'sanctuary jurisdictions' obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. States split on whether to aid or resist Trump Since taking office in January, Trump has enlisted hundreds of state and local law enforcement agencies to help identify immigrants in the U.S. illegally and detain them for potential deportation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement now lists 640 such cooperative agreements, a nearly fivefold increase under Trump. Trump also has lifted longtime rules restricting immigration enforcement near schools , churches and hospitals, and ordered federal prosecutors to investigate state or local officials believed to be interfering with his crackdown on illegal immigration. The Department of Justice sued Colorado, Illinois and New York, as well as several cities in those states and New Jersey , alleging their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Just three weeks after Colorado was sued, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed a wide-ranging law expanding the state's protections for immigrants. Among other things, it bars jails from delaying the release of inmates for immigration enforcement and allows penalties of up to $50,000 for public schools, colleges, libraries, child care centers and health care facilities that collect information about people's immigration status, with some exceptions. Polis rejected the administration's description of Colorado as a 'sanctuary state,' asserting that law officers remain 'deeply committed' to working with federal authorities on criminal investigations. 'But to be clear, state and local law enforcement cannot be commandeered to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' Polis said in a bill-signing statement. Illinois also has continued to press pro-immigrant legislation. A bill recently given final approval says no child can be denied a free public education because of immigration status — something already guaranteed nationwide under a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision . Supporters say the state legislation provides a backstop in case court precedent is overturned. The bill also requires schools to develop policies on handling requests from federal immigration officials and allows lawsuits for alleged violations of the measure. Legislation supporting immigrants takes a variety of forms Democratic-led states are pursuing a wide range of means to protect immigrants. A new Oregon law bars landlords from inquiring about the immigration status of tenants or applicants. New laws in Washington declare it unprofessional conduct for bail bond agents to enforce civil immigration warrants, prohibit employers from using immigration status to threaten workers and let employees use paid sick leave to attend immigration proceedings for themselves or family members. Vermont last month repealed a state law that let law enforcement agencies enter into immigration enforcement agreements with federal authorities during state or national emergencies. They now need special permission from the governor to do so. As passed by the House, Maryland legislation also would have barred local governments from reaching immigration enforcement agreements with the federal government. That provision was removed in the Senate following pushback from some of the seven Maryland counties that currently have agreements. The final version, which took effect as law at the start of June, forbids public schools and libraries from granting federal immigration authorities access to nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant or 'exigent circumstances.' Maryland Del. Nicole Williams said residents' concerns about Trump's immigration policies prompted her to sponsor the legislation. 'We believe that diversity is our strength, and our role as elected officials is to make sure that all of the residents within our community — regardless of their background — feel safe and comfortable,' Williams said. Many new measures reinforce existing policies Though legislation advancing in Democratic states may shield against Trump's policies, 'I would say it's more so to send a message to immigrant communities to let them know that they are welcome,' said Juan Avilez, a policy associate at the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit advocacy group. In California, a law that took effect in 2018 already requires public schools to adopt policies 'limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible.' Some schools have readily applied the law. When DHS officers attempted a welfare check on migrant children at two Los Angeles elementary schools in April, they were denied access by both principals. Legislation passed by the state Senate would reinforce such policies by specifically requiring a judicial warrant for public schools to let immigration authorities into nonpublic areas, allow students to be questioned or disclose information about students and their families. 'Having ICE in our schools means that you'll have parents who will not want to send their kids to school at all,' Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener said in support of the bill. But some Republicans said the measure was 'injecting partisan immigration policies' into schools. 'We have yet to see a case in California where we have scary people in masks entering schools and ripping children away,' said state Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil. 'Let's stop these fear tactics that do us an injustice.' ___ Associated Press writers Susan Haigh, Trân Nguyễn, Jesse Bedayn, John O'Connor and Brian Witte contributed to this report. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Two House Republicans issue megabill threats as Senate ponders changes - Live Updates
Two House Republicans drew firm red lines Friday on changes to the House GOP megabill, threatening to vote 'no' if the Senate made any changes whatsoever to key provisions. Rep. Nick LaLota of New York warned GOP senators against lowering the House's $40,000 cap on the state-and-local-tax deduction, while Rep. Chip Roy of Texas vowed to oppose any attempt to delay or otherwise water down the phaseout of clean-energy tax credits provided for in the House-passed megabill. 'If the Senate waters it down by a dollar, I'm a no,' LaLota posted on X, arguing that the SALT cap as it stands is 'unfair' to his constituents. Roy was equally strict about GOP senators' hesitations on quickly phasing out clean-energy tax credits signed into law under former President Joe Biden — even calling out skeptical Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) by name in a floor speech Friday. Tillis has been critical of the phaseouts, saying the House bill is 'void of any understanding of just how these supply chains work.' 'You backslide one inch on those IRA subsidies and I'm voting against this bill,' Roy said. 'Because those god-forsaken subsidies are killing our energy, killing our grid, making us weaker, destroying our landscape, undermining our freedom. I'm not going to have it.'
