Latest news with #SenateBill42
Yahoo
12-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Illinois bill would remove cannabis odor as probable cause for police to search car
The Brief The Illinois Senate passed a bill to remove cannabis odor as the sole reason for probable cause for police officers to search a car. The Senate sponsor argued the bill clarifies what law enforcement can do during a traffic stop involving cannabis after contradictory Illinois Supreme Court rulings. S.B. 42 still needs approval from the House of Representatives and Gov. JB Pritzker to become law. SPRINGFIELD, Ill. - State lawmakers are weighing a bill that would remove cannabis odor as the sole probable cause for police officers to search a car. The Illinois Senate passed S.B. 42 on Thursday by a vote of 33-20. It was sent to the House of Representatives for passage in that chamber. What we know The bill, sponsored by State Sen. Rachel Ventura (D-Joliet), would still require that cannabis be stored in a secure, sealed, or re-sealable container. Still, if passed into law, law enforcement would not be able to stop, detain or search a car whose driver or passengers are 21 and older solely because of an odor of cannabis. Ventura cited two Illinois Supreme Court rulings that contradicted each other about whether cannabis odor alone was sufficient for probable cause for police to search a vehicle without a warrant. She argued S.B. 42 would clarify how officers could handle such a situation by "directly law enforcement to consider all factors – not just odor – in deciding if the law has been broken." What they're saying Peter Contos, of Cannabis Equity Illinois, a nonprofit that advocates for equity in cannabis policies and industry in the state, argued the bill is "another step forward in modernizing Illinois cannabis laws." "Removing the odor-proof container rule will provide drivers the peace of mind of knowing they cannot be stopped solely for possessing a legal product. Senate Bill 42 will also relieve the burden on law enforcement to decipher the difference between raw and burnt cannabis," Contos said in a statement. What's next The Illinois House of Representatives will have to pass the bill and Gov. JB Pritzker will have to sign it for the measure to become law.
Yahoo
12-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Measure removing cannabis odor as probable cause for warrantless vehicle search passes Senate
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (WCIA) — A bill clarifying that law enforcement cannot search a car based on the smell of marijuana alone has passed through the Senate. The Illinois Supreme Court ruled in two cases last year whether the scent of cannabis is probable cause to perform a warrantless search. In People v. Redmond, the court ruled burnt cannabis odor is not enough evidence to search a vehicle. But in People v. Molina, law enforcement could search a car with the smell of raw cannabis because current state law requires odorless packaging. Homeschool Act stalls in House ahead of April 11th deadline 'A recent state Supreme Court ruling gave a conflicting directive between raw and burnt cannabis, shifting a huge burden to law enforcement to know the difference,' said Sen. Rachel Ventura (D-Joliet). 'This bill aims to bring clarity by directing law enforcement to consider all factors — not just odor — in deciding if the law has been broken.' The bill removes the requirement for odorless packaging, while still keeping the directives for secured, sealed or re-sealable child-resistant containers. Law enforcement would not be able to search, stop or detain vehicles solely with passengers 21 years old or older because of any cannabis odor. Advocates said this is another step forward in modernizing Illinois cannabis laws. 'Removing the odor-proof container rule will provide drivers the peace of mind of knowing they cannot be stopped solely for possessing a legal product,' said Peter Contos of Cannabis Equality Illinois. 'Senate Bill 42 will also relieve the burden on law enforcement to decipher the difference between raw and burnt cannabis.' The bill passed the Senate on Thursday and now heads to the House. Recreational marijuana has been legal in Illinois since 2020. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
05-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
CYFD reforms will help New Mexico make critical progress on child well-being
More than a decade ago, advocates frustrated by New Mexico's persistently low rankings for measures related to child well-being, began pushing for significant investments in early childhood education. Today, thanks to these efforts, our state is a national leader in providing universal, no-cost, high-quality early childhood education and care. Early childhood education, along with family-focused policies like tax cuts for working people, affordable healthcare, and accessible housing, has the potential to help break the cycles of generational poverty that have long plagued families in New Mexico. As a state lawmaker, I am proud to have supported this progress by sponsoring the legislation that created the Early Childhood Education Trust Fund, which provides hundreds of millions in dedicated funding for these programs every year. Yet, as a mom and a social worker, I also know we have much more work to do. For more than 20 years, I have advocated for abused and neglected children in our court system. I have seen firsthand that rates of child abuse and maltreatment in our state remain shockingly high, and our Children, Youth, and Families Department (CYFD) has struggled to protect our most vulnerable kids. All of us are familiar with the high-profile, heartbreaking stories of children who have lost their lives because they somehow ended up back in the custody of abusive or neglectful adults. Unfortunately, there are many more stories of children who were failed by the system that was supposed to protect them, that may not make headlines. That includes: kids sleeping on office floors because there are not enough foster homes; infants put at risk because their parents, who are struggling with addiction, do not receive the treatment they need; children who are left in abusive homes; or those who are repeatedly bounced from one caregiver to another. Our children ultimately pay the price for these systemic failures, and our communities do, too. When kids are harmed, traumatized, or simply not given the support they need to thrive, it contributes directly to challenges like juvenile crime, substance use, and low graduation rates. This, in turn, undermines our progress on breaking generational cycles of poverty, improving public safety, and building a more prosperous and sustainable economic future for all New Mexicans. With that in mind, my colleagues and I came together this session around meaningful legislative reforms to better protect kids by strengthening oversight, accountability, and transparency at CYFD. House Bill 5, which has already been signed into law, will create an independent Office of the Child Advocate to oversee child well-being in New Mexico and give kids a stronger voice within CYFD. Senate Bill 42, which awaits the Governor's signature, would better protect infants born to parents struggling with addiction. This legislation would ensure these families receive the services they need and that the state intervenes if parents fail to complete required steps necessary for the safety of their children. Additionally, we passed legislation to provide tax credits to foster parents and guardians, support grandparents and other relatives raising children, and require that kids in CYFD's care receive their full federal benefits. Just as I was proud to support transformative investments in early childhood education, I was proud to join lawmakers from both chambers and both sides of the aisle to support these important reforms for the state's most at-risk children. Together, these forward-thinking initiatives will help us truly move the needle on child well-being and finally, turn the tide on generational poverty and trauma. This article originally appeared on Las Cruces Sun-News: CYFD reform will result in child well-being
Yahoo
28-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Legislative committee supports yet another version of partisan judicial elections
The door to the old Supreme Court Chamber at the Montana Capitol. (Micah Drew/Daily Montanan) Bruce Spencer, a lobbyist representing the State Bar of Montana, did not need to elaborate on his organization's position on a bill before the House Judiciary Committee on Friday — he's said it all before. 'I'm trying to think of something new to say,' Spencer told the committee. 'I've got to be honest, I don't have much.' Spencer was testifying for at least the seventh time against a bill that seeks to make Montana's judiciary more aligned with partisan politics. Another bill in the same vein was introduced earlier this week. Friday's hearing was on House Bill 838, introduced by Speaker of the House Rep. Brandon Ler, R-Savage. The legislation would allow candidates for the Montana Supreme Court to run under a party affiliation, or under a nonpartisan label. The bill would also create a new primary system for Supreme Court candidates, putting all candidates on a primary ballot regardless of which party primary a voter participates in. The top two candidates, regardless of party affiliation, would proceed to the general election. 'It's my personal opinion that (judges) have already chosen a party to run under,' Ler said. 'We see that time and time again with the way that the Montana Supreme Court operates, whether it's them meddling in our rules, them pre-determining the outcome on the bench of different legislation we have, or the decisions that they make, which seem to be completely against the will of the majority of Montana voters.' The bill had no proponents, but drew a dozen opponents during the hearing. Many of the arguments put forth have been hashed out repeatedly in both the House and Senate so far this legislative session. Three other pieces of legislation have sought to specifically make judicial races partisan. House Bill 295 failed to clear a House vote before transmittal, as did HB 751, which would have required Supreme Court candidates to declare a party affiliation. Senate Bill 42, however, has had more momentum, sailing through the Senate — albeit on partisan lines. SB 42 requires judges at any level to attach a partisan affiliation to their candidacy. Those bills' proponents called them 'voter education' bills, seeking to add transparency to elections that are conducted with seemingly less knowledge of candidates than other partisan races. Ler said since he believes the judiciary is already partisan, voters should be made aware of that before they reach the bench. But opponents pushed back against that characterization, saying judges make rulings based on the Constitution and the law, and should not be beholden to a party platform. 'Judges don't make decisions on the basis of a constituency, and that's what political parties are. They're setting out values for a constituency,' said Al Smith with the Montana Trial Lawyers Association. 'That's not what judges do. They look at the Constitution, the law, the facts of the case. They should be free from political pressure.' Speaking specifically to the characterization of partisan elections as voter education bills, Anne Sherwood, with Friends of the Third Branch, an educational organization focused on the state's judiciary, said the claim voters can't find information about candidates is disingenuous. 'This bill is also not going to increase voter education. It strains credulity that in today's digital age, somebody cannot find information on these candidates,' Sherwood said. '… We have the internet. Now we have Twitter. Now we have Facebook. Now we have independent campaign spending.' Spencer added the State Bar holds forums for Supreme Court candidates every election cycle — another way voters could learn about the candidates. The House Judiciary Committee passed HB 838 out of committee on a 12-8 party-line vote. Two additional bills related to a partisan judiciary met opposing fates in the Legislature. House Bill 39, which allows political parties to spend money on judicial races, was signed by the governor earlier this month, while House BIll 169, which would have let judges and judicial candidates take part in partisan activities, died in the Senate.
Yahoo
19-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Bill removing cannabis odor as probable cause to search vehicle heads to Illinois Senate
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (WCIA) — Legislation which would remove the smell of raw or burnt cannabis as probable cause to search a vehicle passed the Senate Criminal Law Committee on Tuesday. The measure comes from State Senator Rachel Ventura. Illinois Governor JB Pritzker to deliver annual 'State of the State' budget address 'A recent state Supreme Court ruling gave a conflicting directive between raw and burnt cannabis, shifting a huge burden to law enforcement to know the difference,' Ventura (D-Joliet) said. 'This bill aims to clean up that court ruling by directing law enforcement to consider all factors — not just odor — in deciding if the law has been broken.' Ventura said that recently, the Illinois Supreme Court contradicted themselves in two separate cases. In People v. Redmond, the Court ruled that the smell of burnt cannabis alone is not sufficient probable cause for police officers to search a vehicle without a warrant. Illinois Supreme Court: Burnt pot smell doesn't justify warrantless search of vehicles However, in People v. Molina, the Court ruled that the smell of raw cannabis alone did give police probable cause to search a vehicle, because odorless packaging is required by the statute. Illinois Supreme Court rules odor of raw cannabis enough probable cause for officers to search a vehicle Senate Bill 42 would remove the requirement that cannabis in a motor vehicle must be in an odor-proof container. It would still require that cannabis is stored in a secured, sealed or re-sealable child-resistant container. 'SB 42 is another step forward in modernizing Illinois cannabis laws,' Peter Contos of Cannabis Equality Illinois said. 'Removing the odor-proof container rule will provide drivers the peace of mind of knowing they cannot be stopped solely for possessing a legal product. SB 42 will also relieve the burden on law enforcement to decipher the difference between raw and burnt cannabis.' Law enforcement would not be allowed to stop, detain or search a vehicle based only on the odor of cannabis, as long as the drivers and passengers are 21 or older. Illinois bill would require schools to have more military recruitment events The ACLU released a statement in support of Senate Bill 42. The General Assembly has an opportunity to clear up unnecessary confusion by adopting Senate Bill 42. It is highly unlikely that an officer, standing alongside a busy highway or city street, is able to distinguish between the odors of burnt and raw cannabis. Drivers and passengers are legally able to possess cannabis in our state. This confusion over the odor of cannabis should not be a trigger for officers to continue to harass and delay motorists with intrusive searches. These stops and searches are targeted disproportionately against drivers of color in Illinois. We encourage the legislature to clear up this confusion by adopting the very simple language contained in the bill and Amendment #1. Alexandra Block, director of the Criminal Legal System and Policing Project at the ACLU of Illinois The bill passed the Senate Criminal Law Committee on Tuesday. It'll go to the full Senate for further action. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
