Latest news with #HB226
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Meta testifies at Ohio Statehouse in favor of age verification in app store
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — Ohio lawmakers want to give parents more say in what their kids do on their smartphones and tablets. And Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, is on board with the proposal. Ohio lawmakers did pass a bill to require age verification in social media apps, but a federal judge struck that law down after social media companies challenged it, calling it a 'breathtakingly blunt tool' to reduce harm. Gov. Mike DeWine called for lawmakers to take a new approach to age verification for minors, and that is where House Bill 226 comes into play. Victoria's Secret responds after website, app shutdown leaving customers in the dark House Bill 226 would require app developers to determine whether their app is likely to be used by children under 16 years. If so, the developer needs to let the app store know that it will need age verification before being downloaded. This bill would largely impact social media like TikTok, Facebook, Instagram and X. 'Teens use more than 40 different apps a week, so that's a lot for parents and it's a lot of personal information that would need to be shared with each individual app to verify who the parent is and the child's age,' Head of Safety Policy for North America at Meta Jennifer Hanley said. Hanley said she thinks this bill will be more effective, because it does not specifically call out social media apps. 'We've seen courts across the country say if you're looking at things selectively, examining the types of content or who the speaker is, then you're running into First Amendment issues,' she said. 'We think here this kind of addresses that and resolved some of the First Amendment concerns by making it speaker and content neutral instead.' First responders line roads as body of killed deputy returned to Morrow County Hanley said age verification in this form is what parents want, and points to Utah and Texas that have recently enacted similar laws. But some leaders at the statehouse think that companies like Meta are simply punting the responsibility to keep children safe. 'There is certainly no excuse for these big social media, data companies, to not have some sort of guidelines,' Ohio House Minority Leader Allison Russo (D-Upper Arlington) said. 'They certainly know how to develop the algorithms to target minors and there's no excuse for them not also being able to use that as safeguards.' Russo said she does think that this is a step in the right direction but does not go far enough. 'Do I think [HB 226] is going to be as effective as some of the other things we know [social media companies] have the capacity to do using their own algorithms? Certainly not,' Russo said. City of Columbus asks court to dismiss cyber lawsuits 'We at Meta and other companies will still have a role to play in providing a safer, more age-appropriate experiences for teens and looking for those who are lying about their age,' Hanley said. The bill still awaits both a House committee vote and House floor vote before being sent to the Ohio Senate for consideration. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
17-05-2025
- Automotive
- Yahoo
Bill passes allowing darker tints on vehicles
The state Legislature has passed a major reform bill for vehicle window tinting laws, which marks the most significant update since originally enacted in 1983, the House of Representatives announced Friday. 'The legislature finds that darker tints on car windows have a measurable impact on reducing heat trapped in a car's interior, ' House Bill 226 says. It also finds 'the current light transmittance limit of 35 % for glazing on car windows is inadequate to address the increased temperatures caused by climate change.' The bill awaits Gov. Josh Green's signature and, if signed into law, will bring equity to sedan owners who will be allowed to tint their car windows with the same degree of light transmission levels as other vehicles. But the bill also ensures a measure of safety for law enforcement officers since it will require all drivers and passengers of vehicles with applied tinted windows to roll down their windows during traffic stops, with certain exceptions. The bill also raises fines for violators of the law for both vehicle owners and installers of any tinting, which violates the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards 205. It also adds new language to include any sun screening device 'with mirrored or high reflective finishes that produce red, yellow, amber, or blue appearance as viewed from the exterior of the motor vehicle.' 'For too long, sedans have been unfairly left out while trucks, vans, and SUVs benefit from factory tint exemptions, Rep. Darius Kila (D-Honokai Hale, Nanakuli, Maili ), who authored House Bill 226 CD1, said in a news release. 'This is about bringing our laws into the 21st century.' Kila thanked the state Department of Transportation, county law enforcement agencies and local tinting professionals for 'their honest input and collaboration over the last three years. Together we crafted a comprehensive overhaul that's fairer, safer and more enforcable.' T &T Tinting founder Tommy Silva, who has long advocated for fair tint laws, said : 'By removing outdated distinctions, this law ensures equal treatment for all drivers and better sun protection—something that's critical in our climate.' Silva helped draft the 1983 law, said T &T Tinting CEO Kyle Horimoto, who was consulted in drafting HB 226. Horimoto said the bill does not change the portion of the current law that keeps the front windshield of all vehicles at 70 % light transmission, virtually clear, and driver and front passenger windows at no less than 35 %, plus or minus 6 % (the lower the percentage, the darker ). Under existing Hawaii law, darker tints are allowed as low as 5 % light transmission on rear windshields and rear passenger windows of trucks, SUVs and vans, and they can come from the manufacturer at 20 % light transmission, he said. The new bill aligns with the laws in most sunbelt states, Horimoto said, adding many military member customers have had to remove the tinting on their cars when they move to Hawaii. The tinting can reduce heat inside a vehicle by 15 % to 20 %, offers glare reduction, privacy and more security for items on rear seats, Horimoto said. Although the darker tint may make it more difficult to see through the windows when reversing, most newer vehicles come equipped with safety features such as backup cameras, Horimoto said. However, the new law will require that if rear windows are tinted darker, drivers and passengers will have to roll their windows down to allow officers to see inside the vehicles. 'It's a good compromise, ' Horimoto said of the bill. Maj. James Slayter, Honolulu Police Department Traffic Division commander, said : 'We support the passage of HB 226, which strikes a balance between public safety and officer safety. 'This measure helps ensure that officers can better assess potential threats during traffic stops, while still preserving adequate visibility for drivers, ' he said. The legislation will update penalties : 1 ) Drivers with illegal tint may face fines from $300 to $550, (up from $250 to $500 ); 2 ) Installers applying noncompliant tint may be fined from $700 to $1, 200, (up from $500 to $1, 000 ), and must replace the tint or reimburse the vehicle owner. The bill requires tint installers to issue a compliance certificate at the time of installation, and drivers to keep the certificate in their vehicle as proof of legal tint. Failure to produce this certificate may result in enforcement actions. Kila said that for vehicles that have had tinting done previously, a safety check would serve as a compliance certificate, according to the DOT. State DOT Director Ed Sniffen said the bill 'will ensure that vehicle window tint standards are applied and enforced fairly and consistently while increasing safety for our law enforcement officers during traffic stops.'
Yahoo
17-05-2025
- Automotive
- Yahoo
Window tint crackdown? 5 things to know about Hawaiʻi's new bill
HONOLULU (KHON2) — Hawaiʻi is changing how it handles car window tinting. House Bill 226 CD1 is the biggest update since 1983 and is now waiting for the governor's signature. Written by Representative Darius Kila (D-44, Honokai Hale, Nānākuli, Mā'ili), the new law helps make tint rules more fair and easier to follow. H-1 to have full closure this weekend. What you need to know 'This is about bringing our laws into the 21st century,' said Rep. Kila. 'For too long, sedans have been unfairly left out while trucks, vans, and SUVs benefit from factory tint exemptions. This bill ensures that all vehicles can access the same safety protections and sun relief. It's about fairness, clarity and improving public safety.' Hawaiʻi's best ice cream shops help cool off the rising heat Here's what drivers should this bill, trucks, vans and SUVs could have darker rear tint than sedans, which led to confusion and unfair enforcement. With the new law, sedans can now have the same tint levels as other vehicles. The goal is to treat all drivers equally. It's your chance to have dessert with Dolly Parton 'HB226 CD1 will ensure that vehicle window tint standards are applied and enforced fairly and consistently, while increasing safety for our law enforcement officers during traffic stops,' said Hawai'i Department of Transportation Director Ed Sniffen. 'We want to thank the Legislature and Representative Kila for their continued efforts to work with the Hawai'i Department of Transportation and key stakeholders to advance measures that improve safety on our roadways.' A new rule in the bill requires that anyone with fully tinted windows must roll them down during police stops. Lawmakers said this helps officers stay safe and clearly see who is in the vehicle. It also improves trust between drivers and law enforcement. Hawaiian Airlines to enforce new 'no-show' policy starting May 15 When new tint is installed, shops must now give the driver a certificate proving the tint meets legal standards. Drivers need to keep this in their car in case they are stopped. If they do not have it, they could face penalties. Drivers with illegal tint could pay between $300 and $550. Installers who break the law could be fined up to $1,200 and must fix the tint or pay the car owner back. Leaders from the tinting industry, law enforcement and government worked together on this reform. The goal is to make roads safer while protecting people from the sun and making sure laws are fair for all. 'By removing outdated distinctions, this law ensures equal treatment for all drivers and better sun protection — something that's critical in our climate,' said Tommy Silva, founder of T&T Tinting and long-time advocate for fair tint laws. The Honolulu Police Department weighed in on the new legislation. Former Honolulu police chief returns to Hawaii 'As the commander of the Honolulu Police Department Traffic Division, we support the passage of HB226, which strikes a critical balance between public safety and officer safety. This measure helps ensure that officers can better assess potential threats during traffic stops, while still preserving adequate visibility for drivers,' said HPD Traffic Division Major James Slayter. He went on to explain further. 'Clear visibility into vehicles is a key factor in protecting the lives of our officers, and this bill supports that objective without compromising roadway safety standards for motorists,' added Major Slayter. 'As always, we appreciate the collaborative partnership with Representative Kila for the many traffic safety measures he introduced.' Get news on the go with KHON 2GO, KHON's morning podcast, every morning at 8 Rep. Kila said, 'I want to thank the Hawai'i Department of Transportation, our county law enforcement agencies and local tinting professionals for their honest input and collaboration over the last three year. Together, we crafted a comprehensive overhaul that's fairer, safer, and more enforceable.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
07-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Legislature passes law to ramp up deportations; critics say it will mostly target legal immigrants
A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent holds an immigration detainer form in a detention facility. (Photo from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) In an attempt to help the Trump administration accomplish its immigration goals, the Utah Legislature passed a bill on Thursday that repeals a 2019 law shielding migrants from being deported if they commit a misdemeanor offense. But as Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, ramp up deportations, critics worry the bill will disproportionately impact immigrants with lawful status, like visa holders or refugees, while doing nothing to actually facilitate the removal of people in the country without authorization. Sponsored by Rep. Candice Pierucci, R-Herriman, HB226 increases the maximum sentence for class A misdemeanors from 364 days, to 365. Per federal law, if an immigrant spends one year in jail or prison, it automatically initiates deportation proceedings. The 2019 law lowered the maximum sentence by one day, which the bill's sponsor, former Rep. Eric Hutchings, at the time said was an attempt to reduce deportations. 'People with misdemeanors are getting caught up in that net, and there are automatic deportation proceedings as a result,' said Hutchings, R-Kearns, in 2019. The law passed unanimously. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX But with the Trump administration vowing to carry out mass deportations, lawmakers have reversed course. Although it's an incremental change, the one-day increase in sentencing would make it easier to deport migrants who commit crimes, regardless of their legal status. 'In 2019, we asked ICE agents why has Utah been such a magnet for illegal immigration,' said the Senate sponsor, Dan McCay, a Riverton Republican. 'Their response was, this change in policy.' The 365-day sentence in this year's bill only applies to crimes against a person — that mostly includes violent offenses, like assault, stalking, sex crimes, child abuse or violation of a protective order. Driving under the influence was also included in the list of crimes. The bill passed out of the Senate Thursday morning after a 21-8 vote, with Sens. Daniel Thatcher, R-West Valley, and Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, joining Democrats in opposition. It's now headed to the governor's desk. The vote came after a contentious debate. Thatcher said it 'might be the worst bill I've seen this year.' Senate Minority Leader Luz Escamilla, D-Salt Lake City, who accused McCay of 'grandstanding,' said the bill robs people of due process. McCay said that idea was 'foolish.' Both Thatcher and Escamilla worry the bill will disproportionately target legal immigrants, since people without lawful status are already being deported. ICE doesn't need a migrant in the country illegally to serve a one-year sentence to deport them — they can deport them for the lack of documentation alone. 'Right now, ICE is placing detainers on anyone with allegations. Anyone who's undocumented. So if they are arrested and they get put in jail and it's just an allegation, that starts deportation proceedings, and it doesn't matter if they're convicted or not,' said Adam Crayk, a Salt Lake City-based immigration attorney. 'You don't even need to break the law and you're deportable.' Crayk called it a messaging bill. It shows the state is behind the Trump administration, but doesn't actually help federal immigration officials in their goal to deport people here unlawfully, he said. 'It does not really do much, but target those that are potentially already here legally,' he said. CONTACT US Lawmakers acknowledge that HB226 could impact all immigrants. Speaking on the Senate floor Thursday, Calvin Musselman, R-West Haven, told his colleagues 'it does affect those who are legally here working.' But pointing to the list of crimes outlined in the bill, which include sex crimes, violent offenses and more, he said: 'These individuals who are causing these circumstances, maybe it is best that they be deported. These are very serious crimes.' Escamilla offered a counterargument. An immigrant with a protective order might run into their ex-spouse at a grocery store on accident, receive a stalking conviction, spend one year in jail under the new sentencing guidelines, and automatically face deportation upon release. Instead of being able to plead their case to an immigration judge, which they would be able to do had they spent 364 days in jail, the one-year sentence removes the discretion of the courts. 'You're not even going through due process in the immigration court,' she said. In addition to the enhanced penalty, the bill also seeks to facilitate deportations in several other ways. It would: Direct local law enforcement to hand over immigrants to ICE after they serve one year in jail or prison, so their deportation proceedings can begin. Require judges to consider immigrants a flight risk during criminal proceedings. Require jail employees to provide courts and federal immigration authorities with an individual's immigration status. The latter point also gave Crayk, and other immigration attorneys, some heartburn. Immigration law is complex, he said, and he worried that jail employees or other law enforcement officials might misrepresent a person's status. 'They have to figure out that they're unlawful, who's going to do that?' Crayk said. 'You're dealing with the most vulnerable population, then you have jail employees trying to figure out what their status is, then coordinate with ICE?' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
07-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
New poll: Do Utahns support bill to help deport immigrants convicted of crimes?
The Utah Senate voted with the House on Thursday to partially reverse a 2019 criminal sentencing law that some Republicans said has made the state a 'magnet' for illegal immigration. The bill, HB226, would remove impediments for Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to immediately deport immigrants convicted of dangerous crimes, according to the bill's proponents. But it would target immigrants who are otherwise legally present in the state, the bill's critics said during a contentious floor debate on Thursday. By increasing the maximum jail time for certain class A misdemeanors back to 365 days from 364 days, HB226 would enable judges to trigger a federal policy that makes noncitizens — regardless of residency status — immediately deportable if they are convicted of crimes with a sentence of at least one year. Increased enforcement of this deportation policy under President Donald Trump appears broadly popular among Utahns, according to a new Deseret News/Hinckley Institute of Politics poll. The poll, conducted in late February by HarrisX among 805 registered voters, found that 89% of Utahns, including 95% of Republicans and 72% of Democrats, support the deportation of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. who have committed crimes. A majority, or 57%, of Utah voters said they support the deportation of all unauthorized immigrants in the U.S., whether or not they committed a crime after entering the country, while 38% were opposed. The mass deportation of unauthorized immigrants was supported by 7 out of 10 Republicans and opposed by 7 out of 10 Democrats in the state. Survey data and immigration court filings suggest there are at least 145,000 unauthorized immigrants in Utah. The poll found that Utahns are much more hesitant to support the deportation of unauthorized immigrants when they consider their likely family connections. When asked whether there should be exceptions to deportation policies, 69% of Utahns said unauthorized immigrants who are married to U.S. citizens should be exempt and 45% said unauthorized immigrants who are children under the age of 18 should be exempt. While debating HB226, floor sponsor Sen. Dan McCay, R-Riverton, and Senate Minority Leader Luz Escamilla, D-Salt Lake City, disputed whether the bill marked a departure from the Utah Compact on Immigration, an agreement that immigration policy must promote the rule of law and avoid separating families. 'This is a huge policy change that I don't think matches what the Utah Compact said about Utah welcoming the world,' Escamilla said. 'My biggest concern is, what's going to happen to a family that has been here — they own property, a home, they're working, they're legally here.' Central to Thursday morning's debate was whether HB226 violated the due process of legal immigrants by making them subject to immediate ICE deportation, while not changing the policy for immigrants who entered the country illegally and who are already eligible for deportation proceedings. Defenders of the bill made the case that if noncitizens are committing serious crimes then they should not remain in the country. 'I recognize as well that it does affect those that are legally here working but that's why we went and narrowed it like we did,' Sen. Calvin Musselman, R-West Haven, said. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Candice Pierucci, R-Riverton, would increase the maximum class A misdemeanor sentence to 365 days only for offenses against an individual, which include child abuse, sexual misconduct and threats against law enforcement. Pierucci's bill would codify law enforcement practices of coordinating with federal immigration authorities before releasing an unauthorized immigrant convicted of these crimes to ensure they are not returned to Utah communities after their sentence is complete. The Deseret News/Hinckley Institute of Politics poll found that 80% of Utah voters, including 91% of Republicans and 54% of Democrats, think local law enforcement should help deport immigrants who have committed crimes in addition to crossing the border illegally. Another 56% said local law enforcement should help ICE deport immigrants who are in the country illegally, but who have committed no additional crime. This broader mandate was supported by 71% of Republicans and opposed by 71% of Democrats. In addition to outlining coordination requirements between police and ICE, HB226 would also require law enforcement to submit the immigration status of arrested individuals to courts and would give judges the presumption that individuals are considered a flight risk for bail if they are not lawfully present in the country. 'We know that federal policy is broken,' McCay said. 'The question is, is there a way that we can take this magnet status away for illegal immigration to avoid some of the cost?'
