Legislators / Anthony E. Loubet
Anthony E. Loubet
Republican · House District 27
Hear from them directly
Contact Rep. Anthony E. Loubet
- Email: aloubet@le.utah.gov
- Phone: 801-657-0466
- Office: 4956 W 6200 S #434, Kearns, UT, 84118
Constituents get priority, so say you live in their district. Writing about a specific bill? Open it and use Take action for a ready-to-send message.
Watch or join a meeting
Every committee hearing and floor session is open to the public and streamed live on le.utah.gov. Each committee's agenda has the link to watch or join online, and how to sign up for public comment.
Anthony E. Loubet serves on:
- General Government Appropriations Subcommittee
- House Government Operations Committee
- House Judiciary Committee
- Government Operations Interim Committee
- Judiciary Interim Committee
What they've said
117 remarks on 37 billsH.B. 260 Unauthorized Practice of Law Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains that the Senate made technical cleanup changes identified by the drafting attorney and updated the effective date so the bill takes effect immediately upon a two-thirds vote.
▶ Watch at 10:20Read what they said
Yes. So there, uh, in the Senate we made some technical cleanup changes, uh, identified by the drafting attorney and then we also updated the effective date that upon two thirds the bill will go into effect immediately.
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains that the bill narrows trust company language in response to concerns from the Bank of Utah and the Bankers Association, and that the remaining sections are technical changes.
▶ Watch at 35:35Read what they said
And to clarify that this section does not apply to the other areas of the code on lines 2 77 through two 80, in the occasional and isolated provision, the bill changes the word person to individual. This, uh, is to narrow the language and respond to concerns raised by the Bank of Utah and the Bankers Association that certain entities are trying to act as a trust company without being a depository institution. Uh, the remaining sections of the bill, um, are merely technical changes. And with that, I'll yield to any questions.
S.B. 142 Private Probation and Court Ordered Services Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says the bill clarifies that a private probation provider cannot also provide required mental health, education, or rehabilitation services, so the person can use another provider and the conflict of interest is removed.
▶ Watch at 1:01:48Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. We passed this, uh, bill very similarly in a past session. Um, but unfortunately there was some ambiguity in the language. And so this bill is to try to clarify that when a private probation, um, uh, provider is having a, uh, one of the people go through mental health, uh, treatment or they're also having education services or rehabilitation services, they can't also be the provider of those services. Um, what has been happening is that, uh, there has been at least one that we are aware of a probation, uh, provider that will, uh, provide uh, uh, requirements on these individuals that in order to complete probation, they have to, uh, do these mental …
S.B. 201 Shelter Animal Euthanasia Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Presents the bill, which lets rescue organizations request animals from shelters within two days before euthanasia after the five-day stray hold, and says the bill has support from 23 shelter organizations.
▶ Watch at 1:33:03Read what they said
you Mr. Speaker. Uh, this bill, uh, is an acknowledgement of the great work that our animal shelters and our animal rescue organizations do. Um, it's a private, uh, par, uh, private public partnership arrangement where it's trying to help facilitate the rescue of some of these animals before they're euthanized. Um, right now, the way that this would, this bill would work is that it would allow these rescue organizations reach out to the shelters in their community and, uh, develop a relationship with those organizations. Those, uh, and then when an animal comes in that, uh, may need to be euthanized due to capacity, that they are able to notify those shelters that have expressed an interest, uh, …
S.B. 201 Shelter Animal Euthanasia Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Rejects the substitute motion, saying the bill has statewide support and the two-day notice runs concurrently with the five-day stray hold so it creates no undue burden.
▶ Watch at 1:38:31Read what they said
Uh, I, uh, I do, I don't like the substitute, second substitute motion. Um, I reject that. Um, if this bill originally came from rural counties, so this imply this, you could see on the letter of support, you have people, organizations from Kane, from Davis, from Carbon, from Iron, from Wayne, um, all across Weber. So this has, uh, broad support statewide has been talked about with a lot of these organizations. Um, one of the comments that was made is the undue, uh, hardship and burden that this would have on these organizations. But if you read the bill, that's not the case. Uh, the, the, the bill was drafted in a way to not have any undue …
S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Asks to reserve the right to make a motion.
▶ Watch at 1:48:52Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, may I reserve the right to make a motion? You may
S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Asks to reserve the right to make a motion.
▶ Watch at 1:48:52Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, may I reserve the right to make a motion? You may
S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Speaks in support of the bill, praising the substitute sponsor's work to clarify the statute of limitations, and moves to adopt House Amendment number one.
▶ Watch at 1:48:57Read what they said
Thank You, Mr. Speaker. I wanna speak in support of this bill. I commend the, um, substitute, uh, sponsor from West Valley City for his efforts in, um, working with me and other stakeholders in this to try to find us a way to make this section a little bit more understandable. Um, when, when, uh, we were looking at this originally, um, we can understand that there's been a lot of confusion in this area of what the statute of limitations should be. Um, there was confusions of whether it's a three or four or one year. And so, uh, in doing a lot of research, the sponsor was able to, to, to pick a, I think a good …
S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Speaks in support of the bill, thanks the sponsor and stakeholders, and says the bill aims to clarify the statute of limitations while balancing employer concerns and employee rights.
▶ Watch at 1:48:57Read what they said
Thank You, Mr. Speaker. I wanna speak in support of this bill. I commend the, um, substitute, uh, sponsor from West Valley City for his efforts in, um, working with me and other stakeholders in this to try to find us a way to make this section a little bit more understandable. Um, when, when, uh, we were looking at this originally, um, we can understand that there's been a lot of confusion in this area of what the statute of limitations should be. Um, there was confusions of whether it's a three or four or one year. And so, uh, in doing a lot of research, the sponsor was able to, to, to pick a, I think a good …
S.B. 201 Shelter Animal Euthanasia Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Answers that the shelter determines reasonable alternatives and describes exemptions and the rescue group's notice responsibilities.
▶ Watch at 1:49:14Read what they said
Uh, thank you Mr. Speaker. It is the shelter that makes that determination. Okay. Just a follow up question. There is what protects local shelters from liability? If someone later claims that that alternative, there was an another alternative that existed, Uh, the bill itself provides, uh, several different exemptions that it would fall under. So if this is an animal, uh, that is on a list of dangerous breeds, um, that does not apply here. And so in those situations, they'd be able to euthanize the animal if the animal is sick. That also falls into this, um, also under this bill, it's the organization, the rescue organization is the burdens on them to provide notice of their intent …
S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Moves to adopt House Amendment number one.
▶ Watch at 1:49:39Read what they said
Um, I would like to move that we adopt House Amendment number one under my name.
S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains the amendment corrects a citation from the formal judicial review process to the informal administrative review process.
▶ Watch at 1:49:49Read what they said
Yes. With this little change, uh, the CI there, this, the citation that was provided in the Substitute for judicial review, uh, was for the formal process, uh, where this is more of an informal process that's done through the administrative, uh, it's an informal administrative review process. And so this is the correct citation.
S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains the amendment corrects the citation for judicial review to the correct informal administrative review process.
▶ Watch at 1:49:49Read what they said
Yes. With this little change, uh, the CI there, this, the citation that was provided in the Substitute for judicial review, uh, was for the formal process, uh, where this is more of an informal process that's done through the administrative, uh, it's an informal administrative review process. And so this is the correct citation.
S.B. 201 Shelter Animal Euthanasia Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Answers that the bill protects shelters acting in good faith and does not prevent euthanasia consistent with existing state law.
▶ Watch at 1:50:36Read what they said
So, uh, under this bill, one, one thing I do wanna point out on line 76 through 78, it does talk about that an animal shelter that is not an animal shelter is not liable for an act or a mission under the section. If the animal shelter acts in good faith based on the information available to the animal shelter at the time of the act or omission. Um, and in this situation, if they don't have the capacity to be able to, uh, uh, handle at this time, I'm going to double check, but I'm pretty sure under the bill that the, this does not prevent an animal shelter from having to euthanize an animal, um, uh, as …
S.B. 201 Shelter Animal Euthanasia Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Gives a summation saying existing law already governs euthanasia at capacity and the bill aims to provide best practices so rescues and shelters can coordinate transfers without creating a burden.
▶ Watch at 1:53:22Read what they said
Back to your representative Blue Bay for summation. Thank You, Mr. Speaker and thank you colleagues for your questions on this and for, uh, your, your genuine curiosity of and, and desires to help what's best for these animals? Um, a lot of the concerns that, uh, I've heard raised are also governed by existing law. So there are already, uh, laws in the books that talk about how, uh, animals are, are, can be euthanized in the event of, uh, not enough, uh, capacity at a shelter. Um, but it gives a discretion to the shelter. Um, the biggest part of this bill, and what it's trying to do is not create a burden on these shelters. What it's …
S.B. 74 Motor Vehicle Civil Action Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Presents SB 74, which addresses procedures for motor vehicle liability claims, including how claimants communicate with insurers, required claim information, response timelines, and process safeguards, and says insurers and personal injury attorneys agreed to it.
▶ Watch at 2:50:34Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. This bill, SB 74, is a bill that deals about transparency and fairness with motor vehicle liability claims. So this does not make the bill more for one side than the other, but this is Bill is focused on, is on the procedure of how a claimant is able to communicate with an insured and what those requirements are. So this bill will have, uh, requirements that it shows that when somebody, a claimant is reaching out to insurance company, what that, uh, claim has to information that claim has to provide it then also has a timeline in which the insurance company has to respond by. Uh, and then also then talks about what the …
S.J.R. 13 Joint Resolution Honoring Irish and Irish-American Contributions to the Founding of the United States · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Presents the resolution, which marks the 250th anniversary of the United States and honors Irish and Irish American contributions to the nation's founding, and promotes cultural, educational and economic ties with Ireland, including a cooperative committee and a possible honorary consul general in Utah.
▶ Watch at 2:57:11Read what they said
You Mr. Speaker. This resolution commemorates the 250th anniversary of the United States and honors the contributions of Irish and Irish American individuals to the American Revolution and the nation's founding. It also celebrates the enduring ties between Utah and Ireland and promotes expanded cultural, educational and economic partnerships, including the creation of a co cooperative committee and the potential appointment of an honorary consul general in Utah. With that, that concludes my presentation.
S.B. 248 Child Care Expansion Act · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Introduces the bill, noting it was heard in committee with a 5-3-2 vote, as the House floor sponsor.
▶ Watch at 23:24Read what they said
Senate Bill 2 48, childcare Expansion Act by Senator Escamilla. This bill was heard in Economic Development and Workforce Services with a vote of 5 3 2. The house sponsors Representative Blue Bay, Representative Blue Bay.
S.B. 248 Child Care Expansion Act · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Presents S.B. 248 to create a public-private partnership that retrofits a state-owned building for a licensed childcare provider, with a share of spots reserved for state employees and revenue going to the state.
▶ Watch at 23:37Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Uh, SB 2 48 is, uh, create the public private partnership to expand childcare capacity by retrofitting an existing state owned building and leasing it to a private employer that will contract with a licensed Utah childcare provider to operate the center. So what this is doing is that right now in Utah, we have a childcare problem, um, trying to find, uh, affordable available childcare options for parents that are also having to work. And so what this is trying to do is find a, uh, a good solution in order to provide fix and address this problem. Um, so instead of, uh, so what's happening right now is we have a facility that has …
S.B. 248 Child Care Expansion Act · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Responds to concerns that the bill involves one facility, that revenue would return to the general fund, that the program is not being grown, and that the bill is a worthwhile childcare option; urges support.
▶ Watch at 28:02Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, I wanna address some of the comments that were made. I mean, this is a, we're looking at one facility. So this isn't, uh, something that we're doing across the board, or it's not even a program we're looking at growing. This bill is trying to take a facility that we already have, um, that's already has, uh, an existing purpose retrofitting a portion of it so that way we can actually turn it into money that we can, uh, collect that money, uh, would be able to, uh, be utilized for other things, pay back the program and be used for, and would go to the general fund. Um, rather than, there was a …
S.B. 229 State Employee Benefits Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Says they have been talking with the bill sponsor and a substitute is being drafted that is not yet ready.
▶ Watch at 2:15:25Read what they said
Yes. I've been having conversations with the bill sponsor and we have a sub that's being drafted. It should be done soon, but it's not quite ready.
S.B. 229 State Employee Benefits Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Explains the substitute would require every agency to set a leave policy allowing employees to donate leave to coworkers with family or chronic illness, and directs the division of human resources to prepare a model policy.
▶ Watch at 2:32:55Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro tem, uh, motion to adopt third sub, uh, to SB 2 29 in my name. That motion is in order. Would you like to speak to it? Uh, yes. So, uh, what this sub is trying to do is I, I had been receiving lots of, uh, emails and calls from constituents. Um, also had conversations with the Utah Public Employees Association about some of the concerns with, uh, the current version of the bill. And one of the things that kind of kept coming up was concerns for somebody who had either chronic illness or if any event a family member had, uh, become ill and they needed to spend time, use sick time …
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Presented HB 176, which clarifies that trust directors, protectors, advisors, surrogates, and guardians are not trustees and changes the word person to individual.
▶ Watch at 15:38Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. All right. So, uh, house Bill 1 76, um, is trying to, is a first step in, uh, process. Um, right now under Utah law, if you were to try to get a trustee on your family trust, um, the only professional option you currently have is a depository institution, which is a bank. And most banks won't provide that service unless you hit a certain asset level of two to $5 million. Um, and even then, they have restrictions on what type of clients that they, they will work with. Now, there is a bank in Utah that does, uh, provide additional options, but at some point they also, uh, uh, require certain criteria before …
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Asked whether the question concerned possession and holding of trust assets.
▶ Watch at 18:15Read what they said
Sort of. So are you talking about like possession, like holding of the assets? Well,
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Said the provision on trustee control of assets was removed, the bankers association is neutral on the current version, and discussions on asset control will continue.
▶ Watch at 18:39Read what they said
Yeah. So in that bill, that part was taken out. Um, uh, one of the concerns that, uh, the Bankers Association had was just making sure that the language is spelled out regarding that. And so we were looking at other states to try to model our language, and we decided that it was best to continue those conversations. So with this version, the bankers, uh, association is neutral. Um, they're fine with where the bill is at this point. And so we're gonna continue having those conversations to kind of parse between the control of the assets, right? Because banks themselves hold the assets within their own accounts, whereas like an attorney, we have to use financial institutions. Um, …
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Said serving as trustee on an occasional and isolated basis is current law and that defining that phrase is still under review.
▶ Watch at 19:53Read what they said
Yes. Uh, under the occasional and isolated basis. That's already current law. That's usually how an attorney can do it. But they can only do it because it says occasionally isolated. This is one of those outstanding, uh, policy things that we're working on still is what does that even mean? And so right now it's used either narrowly or more liberally, and that's something that we're trying to figure out. How do we, how do we define that?
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Thanked the senator for the motion and said continued work on the issue is prudent.
▶ Watch at 22:40Read what they said
for summation. Well, I appreciate the good senator's motion, Senator Vickers. Yeah, I appreciate the work you've been done on this. 'cause I know that's, it's been a sensitive topic for some time and, and getting according to find a balance that, uh, and I think it doesn't hurt to, to take a pause and look at it deeper. So I think that you're being prudent in that, and, and I look forward to seeing what the results of those discussions are.
S.B. 310 Uniform Intimate Images Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Asked what situations the bill is intended to address, noting an initial understanding that it targeted civil revenge porn.
▶ Watch at 1:31:30Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. Um, so the, the thought, so I initially was thinking that you were targeting the civil side of like revenge porn, but you said that wasn't necessarily it. So what are the situations that this bill is trying to address?
S.B. 310 Uniform Intimate Images Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Asked whether the bill applies to adults only or would give a teen who shared an image beyond its intended recipient a civil remedy instead of criminal action.
▶ Watch at 1:32:21Read what they said
Now, does this bill, uh, would this bill only apply to adults that are disseminating or could you have a situation where, uh, teenagers in high school, one person, uh, individual shares an intimate image with them and then that person then shares it beyond the intended, uh, uh, person that was supposed to receive it. Does this now give that, um, person a cause of action to be able to, instead of going the criminal route? 'cause maybe they don't want to go that route. Yeah. Will this give them the opportunity to have some sort of recourse?
S.J.R. 10 Joint Resolution Amending Court Rules Regarding Jury Selection · House Judiciary Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Asks about the fiscal note showing $0 when the courts may face a financial impact, and says past cost savings from virtual proceedings may not have returned to the state.
▶ Watch at 1:40:21Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. Um, during the conversation with, uh, Mr. Drexel on, uh, resources of the courts, I noticed on the fiscal note of this bill, it showed $0, but it sounded like there may be some financial impact to the courts. Can you speak to the fiscal note? I, I, I can't, um, I don't, I don't know what the impact is to the court. I mean, truthfully, most, most judges across the state are doing in person. Most of, most of it that I've talked to. And I've talked to a lot of judges, um, the judges I talk to support in person. Um, I, I'm trying to be diplomatic on how I say this, right? …
S.B. 221 Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked whether the language change near line 1732 about property tax and sales tax revenue is a policy change.
▶ Watch at 1:28:22Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I am not as familiar with these HT Zs and so this has been very educational, getting up to speed on this, something that you've been dealing with for many, many years. Um, on line 1739 at the very end of the bill, I noticed that it's changing, uh, online, I think 1732, it says a hundred percent of the property tax increment and a hundred percent of the sales and use tax, and it's taking out increment and putting revenue described in subsection whatever. Um, I was just curious, is that a policy change? What revenue are we talking about?
H.B. 231 Restaurant Tax Repeal Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked what alternative funding source the second substitute would use.
▶ Watch at 46:30Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. Uh, you mentioned in the second sub it's a different funding source, um, that's more reliable, uh, compared to the restaurant tax. Can you go into detail what funding source you're talking about?
H.B. 231 Restaurant Tax Repeal Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked to confirm that the alternative would broadly increase the sales tax slightly.
▶ Watch at 47:28Read what they said
Okay. So it's just removing, it's just increasing the sales tax broad broadly across like by a little bit to cover that difference, Right? Yeah. So, so
S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Moves to favorably recommend the first substitute of Senate Bill 270.
▶ Watch at 1:22:46Read what they said
Thank you Madam Chair. Um, I like to make a motion that we favorably recommend SB two 71st sub to the House four. All right. The motion is to favorably recommend the first substitute of Senate Bill two 70.
S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Says debt collection and eviction cases are slowed by individual judicial assistants' custom requirements, and supports consolidating them into a uniform process.
▶ Watch at 1:23:05Read what they said
Yes. So I, I deal, uh, I do quite a bit of debt collection type cases, um, for several clients. And one of my biggest frustrations is that, um, the, the rules state what the process is and what's required, but individual judicial assistance will have their own custom requirements, which makes it really hard for these cookie cutter type default cases. And so it takes more time and effort, um, and just drags out the process. Um, now it would be fine if they had extra requirements and they all shared those extra requirements because then you can just make a system based off of that. Um, and eviction court cases are very similar, where a lot of them …
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · House floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Explains that the substitute clarifies trust company code exemptions for trust directors, protectors, advisors, surrogates, and guardians, changes 'person' to 'individual', removes the CPA and attorney exemption to continue discussion in the interim, and says the broader goal is more trustee options for consumers.
▶ Watch at 1:31:45Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Uh, speaker Pro Tem. Uh, this bill is cleaning up some areas of the, uh, trust company code, um, but it's also creating some exemptions that have already been granted other sections of code to people that this section is not supposed to apply to. Um, there's a little bit of confusion. So, uh, it's to clean up that trust directors, trust protectors, trust advisors, surrogates and guardians are, uh, this section is not applicable to, um, it also under the occasional and isolated exemption it had referred to a person. Um, but the concern with that was that a person also includes an entity. So what we do is we change the word person to individual …
H.J.R. 15 Joint Resolution Amending Court Rules to Address Sanctions and Dismissals · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Presented the resolution, which adds an option for court-ordered donations to a charitable nonprofit as a Rule 11 violation remedy and creates an expedited way to dismiss lawsuits filed by one attorney against another solely because the other represents a client.
▶ Watch at 2:26:51Read what they said
Super short. Hey, prove it. Thank You, Mr. Chair. There's two things this bill does. The first thing is it provides another option for Rule 11, uh, violation that, uh, the court can order somebody to donate to a charitable nonprofit. The second thing it's trying to address is when, uh, an attorney is trying to, uh, file a lawsuit against another attorney solely for the fact that that attorney represents a client, that there's now an expedited way to get out. This is to address a problem with cities where some of the private attorneys that were represented were being, having lawsuits brought against them. And that concludes my presentation.
S.B. 155 Unclaimed Property Amendments · House floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
The bill would let the unclaimed property administrator in the treasurer's office receive confidential information so unclaimed property can be returned to its rightful owner, with the information kept confidential.
▶ Watch at 28:25Read what they said
You Mr. Speaker. This bill is supposed to help the facilitation and return of unclaimed property. Uh, what this bill is doing is going to, uh, allow some sharing of confidential information with the, uh, rights. Let's see, the unclaimed property administrator with the department, uh, or the treasury and then, or the treasurer's office. And then, um, this information will still be kept confidential, but it'll allow, uh, the unclaimed property to be able to return to its rightful owner. And with that, that concludes my presentation.
S.B. 109 Alienation of Affection Amendments · House floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Says the bill eliminates the alienation of affection cause of action, a common-law claim he describes as rarely used now and sometimes used to sue people such as coworkers, friends, therapists, and doctors.
▶ Watch at 59:06Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro Tem. Uh, this bill is fairly short. It just says that eliminates the alienation of affection cause of action. Um, this is a, uh, carryover from the common law, meaning that it's not anywhere in our code. It's not statutory. This is something that is a court made law, um, that had came from the origins that women were property and chattel, uh, chattels another legal word for women or for property. Um, and that, uh, they would be, uh, if you were trying to, if they were having, uh, an affair or leaving you, that that would be considered like you're trying to steal your property. And so that's why there was a cause …
H.B. 260 Unauthorized Practice of Law Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Presents the bill, saying it clarifies how unlicensed people practicing law can be removed from cases, sued for damages, and penalized, and adds a statute of limitations.
▶ Watch at 1:27:38Read what they said
Okay, great. Thank you Mr. Chair. Um, this bill, the unauthorized practice of law amendments, uh, came about because, uh, as an attorney I handle various lawsuits for clients. And in a few of my cases, I started noticing a trend where individuals that were not attorneys were trying to, uh, represent somebody. And the filings that they were putting in the court were not supported in law. Uh, they did not, uh, comport with court procedure and, uh, requested the court to take action on things that not only, uh, drove up the cost for my clients, but they were also causing issues for the court themselves, um, trying to have to spend time responding, uh, to this non-attorney. …
H.B. 260 Unauthorized Practice of Law Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Says the first part of the bill is primarily civil and the criminal portion is in a later section, and that he reads it as containing civil components.
▶ Watch at 1:37:13Read what they said
Okay. Because the, the first part of this bill is primarily civil. It's really sub eight that creates the, the criminal portion of it. Um, and as I read it, yes.
H.B. 260 Unauthorized Practice of Law Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Thanks the committee and says the bill will give enforcement and structure to a growing problem.
▶ Watch at 1:44:04Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I appreciate the motion from the good Senator. So thank you very much. Um, I, for a moment there, I was thinking that I really was the, the worst bill of the session. I was taking great joy in that, and then I found out that he's been telling that to other people. So that's, uh, a little, He didn't win after all. Yeah. Yeah. So, um, but I, I do appreciate this and I do think this will be, uh, a good way of having some enforcement, some structure to, to a growing problem. And I can my statements.
S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Asked whether claimants under subsections A, B and C of section 9.5 have any administrative remedies available.
▶ Watch at 2:07:50Read what they said
You are correct. Alright. Am I on now? Yeah. Yeah. Can you hear me? Here we go. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And you are correct? I am C 24. Um, and thank you Mr. Tolman, for your patience in helping me, uh, answering my questions. Uh, this is an area of law that I'm not very familiar with in the statute as, uh, we were talking about. It isn't exactly, entirely clear, at least it makes it so it sound, uh, a little bit ambiguous on some of the elements. And so I wanted to kinda just touch base on one of the things that we have talked about. So under 9.5, that's section two. There's language that says that, …
S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Asked if an employee could file with the commission and a class action concurrently.
▶ Watch at 2:09:39Read what they said
So if that's the case, is it possible then for an employee to file with the commission and a class action concurrently?
S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Described a constituent unpaid by a startup and asked how equitable tolling would apply in that situation.
▶ Watch at 2:09:59Read what they said
Okay. So they can't take advantage of both. I mean, obviously I would think that whatever outcome of either would be that you couldn't have a windfall of having, getting awarded twice. Right. Yeah. But I was just curious. You wouldn't want that. Okay. Yep. Um, and then the other question about the equitable tolling that was mentioned, um, uh, there was a comment about you could have somebody who made an agreement, uh, with a startup. And, and I can actually speak, like, there's a person in my ward that this is the exact situation where their first job out of college, they're working for a startup, and then all of a sudden they stopped getting paid. And they, …
S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Asked whether employees always have contract claims in addition to statutory wage claims.
▶ Watch at 2:11:59Read what they said
Act. Okay. And, and in all situations, I just help me be clear. Uh, does an employee have those other options like the verbal or written contractual claims in addition to their wage claims under the statute? Or is it only in some situations where these other claims may apply?
S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Asked whether out-of-state lawyers could still bring other claims even with a one-year limit.
▶ Watch at 2:15:47Read what they said
You, Mr. Chair. And, uh, thank you for that. So, a question that I have for you, um, based on what I was hearing from Mr. Tolman. So if, uh, the statute was reduced to one year for something like this, um, uh, that would potentially remove this claim from being brought against your, your client, your employer, but, uh, potentially there still would be other claims that these out-of-state lawyers would bring against your
S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Moved to adopt House Amendment 1.
▶ Watch at 2:25:01Read what they said
Thank you, miss. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I like to move that we adopt amendment number, house amendment number one in my name.
S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Explained the amendment strikes language about exhausting administrative remedies to clarify the section applies only to the private right of action.
▶ Watch at 2:25:10Read what they said
Uh, yeah, briefly. So in, in my, uh, review of the statute and going through it, um, one of the things that added some confusion on that subsection two, was it made it seem like if you were pursuing something under subsection two, you would potentially have two different avenues, uh, that you could pursue both, that you can bring a claim before the Labor Commission and that you would have a private right of action. Um, and so what my amendment is doing is removing the language says, without exhausting the administrative remedies described in sub in section 34 dash 28 dash nine, and rules made by commission under section 34 dash 28 dash nine. Um, because if you're …
S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Waived summation.
▶ Watch at 2:26:41Read what they said
I would like to spend the next 90 seconds talking about, no kidding. I waive.
H.B. 307 Attorney Fees Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Presents the bill, which clarifies that the bad faith attorney fees statute applies to frivolous motions and makes the bad faith definition more objective.
▶ Watch at 3:13:00Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, there's two things this bill is doing. One is, uh, we currently under our law have a bad faith statute. So if somebody files a lawsuit in bad faith, also known as like being a frivolous, uh, lawsuit, that the injured party is able to get their attorney's fees, uh, compensated back to them. Um, and so some judges have applied this to frivolous motions as well, but it's been inconsistent. And so what this bill clarifies is that this also applies to frivolous motions. And then the second thing it does is that, uh, the definition of bad faith has been, uh, revised. The previous standard as interpreted by the courts, was more objective …
H.B. 307 Attorney Fees Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Explains the process in the bill, in which the injured party must show a motion or action is frivolous or lacks a reasonable basis, then show intent to harass or delay, and the court decides whether to award fees.
▶ Watch at 3:14:10Read what they said
Yes. So on, let's see, page 41, lines 1385 to 1411. It talks about what the process would be. And so after a lawsuit, um, you would have, or in this case, if there's a frivolous motion, there would be, um, a lawsuit, a motion filed to have the award of attorney fees. And then, uh, the court, the person who was injured would have to show that the action or motion was frivolous or has no reasonable basis in law or fact. And then the party would have to then also, uh, show if it was intended to harass, cause unreasonable delay, needlessly increase the cost of litigation or abuse, uh, or abuse, the judicial process. And then the …
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Loubet says he wants to speak briefly to the motion to circle, as he is working on a substitute to make a few tweaks and expects to have it soon.
▶ Watch at 1:08:42Read what they said
Uh, thank you Mr. Speaker. Pro tem. Motion to circle Motion is to circle, we'd like to speak to it, Uh, briefly, uh, working on a sub to address a few little tweaks and should have that to go pretty soon.
S.B. 109 Alienation of Affection Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 23, 2026
Makes a substitute motion to favorably recommend first substitute S.B. 109.
▶ Watch at 1:56:54Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to make a substitute motion. Would you like to speak to that? Uh, yes. I'd like to make a motion that we favorably recommend, um, the Senate bill. What's the number?
S.B. 109 Alienation of Affection Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 23, 2026
Supports the substitute motion, saying the claim comes from treating wives as property and conflicts with the goal of no-fault divorce to reduce conflict.
▶ Watch at 1:57:20Read what they said
Yeah. Um, I, I think it's just interesting, um, how this cause of action even came about. I mean, this goes back to, uh, common law where women were treated, treated as chattel and property of their husband. And so if you were trying to, uh, interfere and take away the husband's property, then that was also, there was monetary damages to the person. And we've moved a long way from that. And then more recently with the irreconcilable differences, um, a big reason for that change in 1987 was to take down the heat in these divorces. Instead of both parents going at, at each other and pointing fingers. It was to try to, uh, provide a situation in …
S.B. 109 Alienation of Affection Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 23, 2026
Summarizes that these claims are often used for leverage or revenge in divorces and recommends supporting the bill.
▶ Watch at 2:03:12Read what they said
I you, Mr. Uh, vice chair. Um, I, I, in summary, I just wanted to mention, and I appreciate, uh, representative Nelson's, uh, comments about the, the cases that have been brought, how difficult it is. I mean, in looking through the type of cases that have been brought, these were all, uh, these type of cases are generally used to black BA mail or for leverage in type divorce type proceedings to try to help. It's also kind of interesting that in looking at the Supreme Court cases, the these type of cases are generally brought by the husband, uh, who is trying to go after, uh, the wife for leaving him. And so it's interesting how that dynamic …
H.B. 472 Division of Licensing and Background Checks Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Explains that the bill cleans up code sections missed when Health and Human Services and related code were merged, and narrows the definition of persons associated with a licensee to officers or positions of influence so DHHS can address people tied to entities that lost licenses.
▶ Watch at 55:37Read what they said
Um, several years ago we, uh, combined our Department of Health, uh, services and our Department of Health services. So we have the Department of Health and Human Services. Uh, in that process we also took two bodies of code and merged them together. And in that process, uh, there was a lot of renumbering and some sections, uh, were not carried over. So this bill does a little bit of cleanup where it's going through, uh, any sections that may have been missed or being added. Um, another thing that this bill is doing is that it is refining the definition of associated with the licensee. Uh, the current definition is very broad and it's includes everybody who's working …
H.B. 474 Uniform Commercial Code Modifications · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Loubet explains that the bill amends the secured transactions provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code to create a new asset class, controllable electronic records such as cryptocurrency, to specify who owns them and to bring Utah law into conformity with other states.
▶ Watch at 1:13:14Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro Tem. Uh, this bill is amending sections of our surge secured transactions, part of the code. Um, currently under our law there are three different asset classes. There's money, there's investment property, and then there's the kind of the catchall of general intangibles. Well, each of these talk about who has ownership and priority. Um, but one of the new things that we are now dealing with is cryptocurrency. And a lot of those things aren't, uh, the same. And so what this section is doing is creating another asset class called con, uh, controllable electronic records. And for example, under a general intangible, the ownership is the first in, uh, first in time is …
H.B. 474 Uniform Commercial Code Modifications · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Loubet answers that the bill replaces the word authenticated with signed, since a signed record is defined as authenticated, to make the code consistent.
▶ Watch at 1:15:11Read what they said
So the definition of a signed record, uh, if you look at it is what makes it authenticated. So there, the parts of this code are trying to update the verbiage so that way the term is signed, uh, get replaced where the words authenticated are, because there was both being used in the code. And so this conforms with the, the word signed. So either way it's still authenticated, but this is telling the way in which it is authenticated.
H.J.R. 15 Joint Resolution Amending Court Rules to Address Sanctions and Dismissals · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Explains that the bill amends civil procedure rules so attorneys representing municipalities cannot be sued merely for representing their clients, and adds an option for sanctioned parties to pay or donate to legal aid.
▶ Watch at 51:24Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Uh, in Utah, there's been a problem with our cities. Um, for most of our cities, they contract out their legal services to a private law firm. Um, and, uh, some litigants, as they're suing the city, have started including the attorneys that represent the, the municipality just for the sole fact that they're the attorneys that are representing the municipality. And so, um, what that has done has caused, uh, concerns and issues where, um, that attorney that is now a party to the case in which they're representing their client, does that cause a conflict? And now they're no longer able to represent their client. And so what this bill is trying to do …
H.J.R. 15 Joint Resolution Amending Court Rules to Address Sanctions and Dismissals · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Says cities contracting out legal services face litigation risk that raises insurance premiums, making it harder to retain private counsel, and that the bill is meant to help small cities secure representation.
▶ Watch at 54:22Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, just in summary, the, the issue that these cities have been having is that they've been trying to retain private counsel and because of this litigation risk, uh, the insurance premiums have made it harder for them to, uh, enter into these engagements with the cities. And so, uh, this is supposed to help be able to have these little cities that contract out for services be able to have the representation they need. And, uh, that concludes my presentation.
H.B. 112 Political Advertising Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Rep. Loubet moved to adopt the second substitute for HB 112.
▶ Watch at 1:48:54Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. Um, I like to make a motion that we adopt, uh, the second sub of HB one 12.
H.B. 112 Political Advertising Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Rep. Loubet moved to favorably recommend the second substitute of HB 112 to the House floor.
▶ Watch at 1:49:43Read what they said
Alright, thank you. I like to make a motion that we favorably recommend HB one 12 second sub to the house floor.
H.B. 503 Real Estate Modifications · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Presented H.B. 503 as a way to reduce costs for homebuyers, citing title insurance and mortgage fees, and asked that the bill be moved to interim study.
▶ Watch at 1:11:52Read what they said
Yeah. Thank you. Mr. Chairman may present from here. Absolutely. Thank you. Um, so, uh, actually I've had, we had a good conversation with various stakeholders yesterday. And so, uh, we would like to actually move this to, uh, interim study item, if that's possible. Okay. Is that, is that gonna be the Presentation? Is That gonna be the presentation? Yeah, I would, the, the, the short presentation is that this bill, what we're trying to do is reduce the cost to consumers that are trying to, uh, buy homes. And so one way we're looking at, we've been looking at it, is, um, the cost that it could, uh, it you have to pay for title insurance and on …
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Presented H.B. 176, which would let individual attorneys and CPAs act occasionally as trustees under defined limits on marketing and conflict disclosure, and said the first substitute makes these changes.
▶ Watch at 2:17:40Read what they said
You, Mr. Chair. And I had a slideshow, but because of time, I'm just gonna forego my slideshow and just go into my presentation. Alright. Um, so as a bit of background, I mean, you've, uh, the committee had a bill file opened in the interim to, um, look at addressing the, the gap that we currently have. Um, right now, under our current state law, we have, uh, a provision in which individuals are able to act on an occasional basis as a trustee. Um, and that's used if you have a family trust, uh, to have family members serve in that capacity. But the hard part is, and I don't know how it is for your families, but …
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Said the law is unclear on when attorneys and CPAs acting as trustees exceed the occasional scope, and that the bill aims to allow the service without requiring full bank-level requirements. Introduced Jeff Cardin, an estate planning attorney.
▶ Watch at 2:21:05Read what they said
Yeah, that's great. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, and I forgot to mention, I have, uh, Jeff Cardin with me. He's an estate planning attorney. Uh, and he's here on behalf of other estate planning attorneys that are also dealing with this issue. And the problem we're trying to solve is that right now it is not very clear about attorneys and CPAs being allowed to be trustees. Um, it's really clear if it's like a family member, 'cause it's a very limited basis, but sometimes attorneys will have a few different clients ask them to be trustees, and at what point in time does that exceed the occasional scope? And so we're trying to figure out how do we …
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Said the bill limits the scope of business for attorneys and CPAs and includes the advertising prohibition and conflict provisions discussed with banks, and that talks with banks are ongoing.
▶ Watch at 2:22:14Read what they said
Well, I didn't bring this bill to the interim. That was a committee bill file. I was just, had an interest in the subject matter, so I I talked about it. Um, so in the conversations, the, the, the comments that were raised, um, were dealing with the scope of how much business a attorney or CPA could take. And so we wanted to limit that in this bill to only the individuals. They weren't out there competing. The second was also the prohibition of advertisement, which was also something that was discussed, um, with them. And then the conflict of interest, that provision was also done. Um, and so it incorporates some of the stuff that we had been …
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Said current law already allows family members with no professional regulation to serve as trustees, that attorneys already handle large client trust funds, and that the bill mirrors other states' approaches.
▶ Watch at 2:24:17Read what they said
Um, so in response to that, I, uh, I, I'm happy where the bill is at this current point, and I'm happy to have additional conversations and continue to do it. Um, what I think is interesting is that currently under the law, a family member with no experience, with no liability, no professionalism and no insurance can fill this capacity. But if we want to have a CPA or an attorney step in that role, they now have to meet capitalization requirements. They have to go and, uh, be regulated by DFI. And in this situation, attorneys are already acting in this capacity already. In other contexts, I can have millions of dollars in my client, my client trust …
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Opposed the motion, saying bank requests would have made the bill worse than current law and that other states allow this service with an advertising prohibition. Asked to have his co-presenter respond to questions.
▶ Watch at 2:39:35Read what they said
Yes. I'd like to make a response. Um, what is is frustrating with some of the misrepresentations, uh, how some of the requests by the banks made it so the bill would have been worse than the current status quo. And we have been trying to model this at a, after other states that have allowed these permissions, that have allowed this service available to the public. And that there was an understanding in these communities that by having a prohibition on the advertising, they weren't putting these services out to the general public. So I, I, uh, am not supportive of the motion. Um, I, if it's okay, I would like to have my cos speaker just respond to …
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Introduced the co-presenter to respond to questions. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 2:40:25Read what they said
Uh, yes. That this bill deals with a lot more than just, than just Will you introduce yourself? Oh,
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Supported the substitute motion and asked for a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 2:43:33Read what they said
I, uh, I appreciate the substitute motion and I'm supportive of it, and like my sub adopted and would love to have it recommended favorably.
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Supported the motion and said conversations on the bill would continue.
▶ Watch at 2:48:10Read what they said
Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I, uh, uh, appreciate the motion and I, I support it. Um, I will say that, you know, there's gonna be ongoing conversations, but to get those conversation happening and to start moving, uh, the bill forward, I would love that to help keep the conversation going.
H.B. 176 Trust Business Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Said several online supporters were not heard due to time, that conversations with stakeholders and DFI will continue, and requested a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 2:50:42Read what they said
Thank you. Um, so I had several individuals online that were gonna speak in favor of the bill, but for time we didn't go to them. So that's part of the reason why you didn't hear those. Um, we've had conversations. We will continue to have conversations. Um, I, I've been working with DFI as well to make sure if there's an apo, uh, spot where they wouldn't oppose it. Um, and so I would respectfully, uh, request this committee's, uh, favorable recommendation.
H.B. 333 Adoption Records Access Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 17, 2026
Moved to place H.B. 333 on the consent agenda.
▶ Watch at 1:02:21Read what they said
Thank you Madam Chair. I like to make a motion that this, uh, uh, bill be added to the consent agenda.
H.B. 307 Attorney Fees Amendments · House floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Rep. Loubet said the current bad faith statute allows attorney fees for bad faith lawsuits, some judges have applied it to frivolous motions inconsistently, and the bill clarifies that it also applies to frivolous motions.
▶ Watch at 22:47Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Right now on our books, we have a bad faith statute that in a civil action, if somebody filed a lawsuit in bad faith, the uh, injured parties entitled to their attorney's fees. Um, and some judges have applied this to frivolous motions as well, but it's been inconsistent. So this bill, uh, clarifies that this also applies to frivolous motions. And that concludes my presentation.
H.B. 446 Conflict of Interest Disclosure Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Asked what happens if a person has an unresolved tax lien on their property that they were not aware of when disclosing.
▶ Watch at 53:12Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, curious on the tax lien. So in the event somebody has a tax lien on their property, but they're not aware of it, um, I know that happens from time to time where somebody doesn't know until they go to sell their house and they realize, realized that somebody had filed a lien on the property. Um, what's the, what's the effect on this if somebody had not disclosed, uh, that there was an unresolved tax lien because they weren't aware of it?
H.B. 446 Conflict of Interest Disclosure Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Asked about the consequences for failing to disclose an unresolved tax lien or convictions.
▶ Watch at 54:29Read what they said
Do you know what the consequences if somebody fails to disclose like an unresolved tax lien or for like forgets to or doesn't disclose like convictions and stuff like that?
H.B. 446 Conflict of Interest Disclosure Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Discussed the penalties for failing to disclose and noted the bill does not change them. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 54:59Read what they said
Okay. So Yeah, I was looking at, I wasn't a hundred percent sure, but that's okay. Um, There are some penalties definitely. Okay. For failing to now that may be just for not filing and I can't remember what they are, but, um, but I know that there are penalties. Let's see. I'm sorry, I dunno, exactly, but I wouldn't, I wasn't changing the penalty. Okay. I wasn't changing it from whatever it currently is where it's Okay. Mm-hmm. Alright. Well thank you Mr. Chair. You know, I'm not always a fan of you attorneys, but sometimes you ask interesting questions.
H.B. 474 Uniform Commercial Code Modifications · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Presents HB 474 to add a fourth asset class, Controllable Electronic Assets, under Article 12 of the Uniform Commercial Code for digital assets, and says the Bankers Association and a BYU professor were consulted.
▶ Watch at 47:34Read what they said
That is perfect. Alright. Thank you. Pull up my, Oh, Okay. Great. Alright. So, uh, as for many of you are probably familiar, the Uniform Commercial Code, uh, is a group that will, um, propose, uh, legislate or legislation to help with uniformity of, uh, transfers of commercial assets, um, between within the state and between states. Um, and so this one is a recent amendment and it's to, uh, address a current reality. So previously, under our current current code, um, actually not previously current, under our current code, uh, there are three different asset classes. We've got money, investment property, and then we also have general intangibles. But in our modern, uh, day and age, we also now …
H.B. 474 Uniform Commercial Code Modifications · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Explains that the bill addresses who holds digital assets in a wallet, control priority, and fungibility for transfers.
▶ Watch at 53:47Read what they said
I don't know. Yeah. So, so with this one, um, the, as Howard mentioned, as I mentioned about the different asset classes, cryptocurrency is transferred and handled differently than the general intangible category. And so because of the whole blockchain type thing, this code goes into a little bit more detail of like, who is actually holding the assets in the digital wallet. And that allows, uh, this also allows, um, the holder to exclude those others that are not related to that transaction. And so, um, the big two big functions are the priority by the control and the fungibility for buyers to be able to transfer these assets.
H.B. 474 Uniform Commercial Code Modifications · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Says blockchain tracking is beyond his familiarity and that the bill reflects how these assets are transferred.
▶ Watch at 54:49Read what they said
So that is generally how the blockchain works. Now, that gets into the whole blockchain area, and that is way beyond what I'm familiar with. Um, and so the, the bill is trying to like, reflect how those currency or not currencies, how those type of assets are transferred, but I don't know, it doesn't, I'm not familiar with like, the level of, uh, detail of how blockchain works.
H.B. 370 Sex Offender Oversight Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Said removing the lines would not make the law retroactive, since the May 6, 2026 effective date would apply the rules to everyone going forward, and he is not very worried about ex post facto issues.
▶ Watch at 1:35:36Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. Um, I just wanted to make a clarification. Now, I'm not making a formal legal opinion, but generally with stuff like this, with the omission of line 6 81 and 6 82, it says that for offenses committed on or after July 1st, 2026, they would be, uh, going forward would be subject to this. Yes. But this removal doesn't make this law retroactive where it'll go back and undo things that have already happened. So the Utah law requires that if something's gonna be retroactive, it still has to be, uh, specifically put into the statute that's retroactive. If you look at the very end on line 8 41, this bill takes effect on May …
H.B. 540 Judicial Transparency and Information Access Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Asked whether the cooling-off provision would be enforceable given existing professional conduct rules on conflicts and firewalls, and why the bill uses two years rather than the one-year period for lobbying.
▶ Watch at 1:49:54Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And don't worry about it. I was just, uh, thinking through my questions as you were talking deep thought, keep Thought. Um, my, my question for you, uh, I've got a will it, it will be okay, Mr. Chair if I ask a couple questions. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, that was a really good ventriloquist type thing. I was also in deep thought. So, um, I I, I'm familiar with Utah Constitution that allows the legislature to be able to have some shared overlap with the judiciary on rules of civil procedure and evidence. But when it comes to the practice of law and regulating that, uh, the Constitution is pretty clear that that's …
H.B. 472 Division of Licensing and Background Checks Amendments · House Health and Human Services Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Presents HB 472 and says a DHHS director will walk the committee through the substitute bill.
▶ Watch at 1:35:48Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair and thank you members of the committee. Um, with me today is Shannon Toman Black, uh, director for division of licensing and background checks at DHHS. She'll be helping me with the presentation and by helping me, she'll be doing 99% of the presentation. Um, sounds a lot like my marriage, but, uh, anyways, um, so, uh, with this bill there is a first sub online, and so we will be presenting to that. And with that, I'll turn the time over to Shannon.
H.B. 472 Division of Licensing and Background Checks Amendments · House Health and Human Services Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says the bill works with DHHS to make clarifications and cleanup, and asks for the committee's support.
▶ Watch at 1:43:14Read what they said
Uh, I appreciate the, the motion. I mean, this is a bill that working with DHHS would help make some clarifications and do some cleanup. Uh, so I would appreciate the committee support.
H.J.R. 15 Joint Resolution Amending Court Rules to Address Sanctions and Dismissals · House Rules Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Presents the resolution, which amends court Rules 11 and 41 to add a charitable-contribution sanction option for Rule 11 violations and to allow quick dismissal of attorneys sued only for representing a party, with fee awards for bad-faith suits.
▶ Watch at 48:47Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. Is my mic, mic on? Should be Okay, good. Let's, so I'll try to keep it relatively short so that Way you can bring it just a little bit closer to your mouth. There. Is That better? That's better. Way better. Okay. Hello, committee. Um, alright. This is HDR 15. This, uh, bill is doing two things. One, it's amending Rule 11. Rule 11 is the section of the code that talks about making, uh, uh, certain representations to the court. Uh, and if there's any issues with that, anything that was misrepresented to the court. It also gives the court options for sanctions and, uh, limitations, um, when brought to …
H.J.R. 15 Joint Resolution Amending Court Rules to Address Sanctions and Dismissals · House Rules Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says he has talked with judges, who were receptive to the charitable-contribution option as a possible sanction remedy.
▶ Watch at 53:12Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I've had some conversations with judges in their unofficial capacity individually, and I kind of threw this idea by them to say like, you know, how come it's a frustration sometimes where you have these Rule 11 sanctions violations and they're just not being enforced? And in talking with them, sometimes they feel like maybe both of the parties are bad actors in a situation, or they don't want to sanction to have the money to just get put into the general fund. They're like, well, we don't know. We, we don't wanna necessarily exercise that. Um, and so in talking about this third option, uh, they actually seemed like kind of like, Hey, this …
H.J.R. 15 Joint Resolution Amending Court Rules to Address Sanctions and Dismissals · House Rules Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Thanks the committee for the motion and says it is a good bill; waives summation.
▶ Watch at 56:52Read what they said
Yes, I, I, I'm grateful for The motion and oh, I appreciate the motion and I, uh, wanna say this is a good bill. Alright, to the maker of the motion, I'll waive.
H.B. 384 Executive Branch Agency Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Moved to favorably recommend the first substitute to HB 384 to the House floor.
▶ Watch at 1:56:27Read what they said
I'd like to make a motion that we favorably recommend HB 3 84 first sub to the house floor.
H.B. 384 Executive Branch Agency Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Said Rep. Thurston has worked to improve government efficiency and organization, and that the bill is good policy.
▶ Watch at 1:56:36Read what they said
Uh, briefly. So, in working with Representative Thurston, he's the chair of the general government appropriations. I'm the vice chair. And, uh, I've seen the, the painstaking efforts that he has been doing to try to improve government efficiency and organization. And so this is, I I view this as one of the many efforts that he's been doing to try to clean up some of the things and make things, um, better structured and organized. And so I appreciate the good sponsor for running this bill and I think it's good policy.
H.B. 384 Executive Branch Agency Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Moved to favorably pass out the first substitute to HB 384.
▶ Watch at 1:57:40Read what they said
Oh, thank you. Thank you. 3 84. I moved. I think I'm still stuck on the fact that Stoddard got a bill through my committee.
H.B. 384 Executive Branch Agency Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asked to place the bill on the consent calendar and moved to do so.
▶ Watch at 1:58:10Read what they said
Any chance you would put this on a consent so I don't have to deal with it on the floor? I'd like to make a motion that we move with this on consent.
H.B. 261 Electronic Information Privacy Act Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 11, 2026
Moves to adopt the second substitute for HB 261.
▶ Watch at 1:02:13Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that we adopt the second sub for HB 2 61.
H.B. 261 Electronic Information Privacy Act Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 11, 2026
Moves to favorably recommend HB 261 second substitute to the House floor.
▶ Watch at 1:02:44Read what they said
You, Mr. Chair. I'd like to make a, uh, motion for a favorable recommendation of HB 2 61 to the house floor.
H.B. 261 Electronic Information Privacy Act Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 11, 2026
Says the bill is good policy and praises the sponsor for working with stakeholders, and hopes it receives a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 1:02:54Read what they said
Uh, just briefly, I, in reviewing the, uh, the policy, um, it's, it's a good policy. It's a good bill. I think, uh, he's been really good at working with the different stakeholders to on the policy, so I hope that, um, yeah, it'll get a favorable recommendation.
H.B. 94 Criminal Accounts Receivable Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 11, 2026
Says he appreciated the last online commenter's points, hopes the sponsor will consider them, and states he will vote no for now. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 3:00:55Read what they said
Wait. Well I was, it's all right. Just know what I'm gonna talk about later. Okay. I mean, Say what you want on a record. I I'm not trying to, it's okay. I, I happen to like what our last, um, online commenter had to say and I think made a lot of sense. So, um, I'm hoping that the sponsor will take those into account and, and be willing to, to look at that, but as of right now, I think I'm a no thank you.
H.B. 260 Unauthorized Practice of Law Amendments · House floor debate (day 18) · Feb 6, 2026
Presents H.B. 260 as a sponsor, saying it addresses unauthorized practice of law by non-attorneys in four ways: removal remedies for parties, clearer Bar enforcement processes, criminal provisions, and a private right of action for injured persons.
▶ Watch at 2:35Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. This bill came by way, as many of you know, I am an attorney by profession and, uh, I do, uh, a good deal of lawsuits in, uh, the district court. And I started noticing something with a growing frequency of individuals that are not attorneys that are entering appearances as an attorney and, uh, trying to represent the defendant in a case. And, uh, as part of this process, some people might think that that sounds like it's a great idea, except the people that are, are trying to make an appearance don't really understand the law and there are documents that are being filed that are actually hurting their clients. And so, um, the …
H.B. 260 Unauthorized Practice of Law Amendments · House floor debate (day 18) · Feb 6, 2026
Answers that attorney's fees are discretionary and follow a demand letter and lawsuit, that general business consulting differs from applying law to specific facts, and that the bill clarifies existing law and makes enforcement more consistent.
▶ Watch at 9:26Read what they said
Um, oh, now I answer. Okay. That'd be a great time. Okay, so line 63 through 65 of the bill, if you were looking at it, what he's referencing or the good, uh, sponsor from Southern Utah, Southern Sanpete County. That's the Middle Sanpete County. Okay. Middle, middle-ish, Utah. Um, the board may bring a civil action against a person for GA in the authorized practice of law. If the board prevails in the civil action described in subsection four A, the court may, and one of the remedies is attorney's fees. This isn't a guarantee. This is something that the board, which would be the bar, the unlawful practice of law committee, if they decide that if an individual …
H.B. 260 Unauthorized Practice of Law Amendments · House floor debate (day 18) · Feb 6, 2026
Says the bill does not let an attorney sue an individual, and that only the injured person, the Attorney General's office, or the Bar may bring suit under it.
▶ Watch at 12:54Read what they said
I'll respond. So, Mr. Speaker Pro Tem, uh, no. The bill does not give a private right of action to any attorney to sue an individual. The only person who's able to bring a lawsuit under this bill is either the person who is injured, the ags office or the bar. That's it.
H.B. 260 Unauthorized Practice of Law Amendments · House floor debate (day 18) · Feb 6, 2026
Gives closing summation, saying the bill targets people who charge for legal services or present facts as legal advice, does not change the definition of practice of law, and sets a consistent standard for how these cases are resolved.
▶ Watch at 15:57Read what they said
Yeah, uh, I wanted to, uh, I'd like to thank the sponsors and those that, uh, uh, well, like not sponsor. I'd like to thank those that, uh, asked questions. Um, I really appreciated, um, the dialogue and I think it was really important to be able to bring out the fact that in this situation, um, we're not looking at trying to punish anybody who is trying to act in good faith. Um, we're not looking at, uh, look, uh, individuals that are consultants trying to work with businesses. What we're looking at really trying to do is find those individuals that are out there trying to perform legal services, that are trying to, uh, collect money for it, …
H.B. 207 Competency Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 5, 2026
Spoke in support of the bill, saying it helps the Utah State Hospital's workload and gives attorneys an earlier decision point on challenging evaluations.
▶ Watch at 1:20:42Read what they said
Yes. Uh, no. I wanna speak in support of the bill. Um, I spoke with a good sponsor earlier today and, and this bill does some good things. I run a lot of competency petitions. I appreciate the evaluation from the Utah State Hospital. They're overworked, and I hope this will, uh, accomplish better, uh, economy of their resource. Also, um, you know, forces attorneys to make on the front end a decision about how they want to approach competency and if they want to challenge the findings of a DHS evaluator to, uh, uh, do so on, on, on their own resource and get an independent, mandatory, independent, uh, uh, challenge if it's, uh, expos facto. So I appreciate …
H.B. 307 Attorney Fees Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 5, 2026
Presented HB 307, which applies the bad faith attorney fee statute to frivolous motions as well as lawsuits and replaces the bad faith definition with a more objective one after feedback.
▶ Watch at 1:22:10Read what they said
Okay, I will. Wonderful. Please proceed. Great. Um, I'll give a little bit of a background. So, uh, this is a bill that, uh, if you are involved in civil lawsuits, you might find it interesting, and if you aren't, you will be bored. So I'll try to keep it very brief and to the point. Um, in, uh, section 78 B dash five dash 8 25 of Utah Code. It's known as the bad faith statute. If somebody filed a frivolous lawsuit against you, you'd be able to, uh, file a motion with the court to collect your attorney's fees. And so, uh, but what has happened is that courts have inconsistently applied this to motions as well. So …
S.B. 35 Amendments to Interdisciplinary Parental Representation Pilot Program · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Said he had intended to make the same motion and spoke in support of the bill.
▶ Watch at 2:03:04Read what they said
Oh, I was gonna try to make the same motion. Oh, I apologize. It, I just saw your blinking. Do you wanna talk? I speak to the court. Okay. Thank you.
H.B. 330 Liability Limitations Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Asked for more detail about the kinds of cases the bill would address.
▶ Watch at 2:13:44Read what they said
Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I just have some que questions based off of, uh, the sponsor's, um, scenario. So you were giving a scenario of an entity, uh, here in Utah, potentially like energy that is getting, uh, litigation brought against it because of regulations in New York. Could you gimme a little bit more, maybe I misunderstood, I'm, I'm trying to understand what kind of cases we're, we're looking at.
H.B. 330 Liability Limitations Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Asked for examples of the lawsuits being brought in other jurisdictions.
▶ Watch at 2:14:25Read what they said
Okay. Am I correct? Yeah. In that. Okay. And what, what specifically, do you have any examples of like what kind of lawsuits are being brought in these jurisdictions?
H.B. 330 Liability Limitations Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Asked for hypothetical situations in which the bill could conflict with civil law.
▶ Watch at 2:29:20Read what they said
Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I had a question where you were mentioning that, uh, this could have brought applications to different areas of civil law. I was curious, do you have any hypothetical situations in which this would cause conflict or cause an issue?
H.B. 330 Liability Limitations Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Asked whether the plaintiff's argument is that the defendant did not comply with the statute.
▶ Watch at 2:30:37Read what they said
Okay. So it looks like in the bill that there is, I mean, 'cause you're, you're mentioning that they're not complying with the statute, right?
H.B. 311 Elections Study · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Asks the chair for permission to pose questions to the sponsor.
▶ Watch at 1:42:49Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, may I ask the presenter a series of questions? Yes,
H.B. 311 Elections Study · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Asks how volunteer poll workers will be prepared to make signature judgment calls.
▶ Watch at 1:42:59Read what they said
We, yeah. Yeah. It'll probably be just like one, but, um, uh, my question is on this. So a lot, a lot of these poll workers are volunteers. Um, are they gonna be, my concern is, is that you're gonna have individuals that are making judgment calls that may not have the expertise in something like this. Um, have you had thoughts about like, how to address that issue?
H.B. 260 Unauthorized Practice of Law Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Presented HB 260, saying attorneys have seen non-lawyers entering appearances for parties, that the bill sets removal procedures, expands Bar remedies and injunction standards, adds criminal penalties, and creates a private right of action.
▶ Watch at 2:08:22Read what they said
All right. Thank you Madam Chair. Uh, my presentation was gonna be an hour, but I know we're gonna get kind of pressed for time, so I'll just cut it back to 55 minutes, if that's okay with Madame Chair. I will be setting a timer for two minutes. Well, my name is, uh, representative Anthony Lube. Um, I am presenting on the first sub to house Bill two 60 that came out earlier today. So in case of you, some of you were looking at an older version, there's a newer one online. Um, with me is Mary Beth Lihue, and I'll have her do more thorough introduction just a minute. Um, but where this came, uh, this bill …
H.B. 25 Candidate Petition Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Moved to proceed to the next agenda item, saying he and the sponsor are still working on remaining issues and need more time.
▶ Watch at 1:31:41Read what they said
Alright, thank you Mr. Chair. Um, I would like to move that we move on to the next agenda item and can I speak to it? Yeah, please speak to the motion. Uh, so with this bill, I was working with the bill sponsor over the weekend. Um, and I appreciate the substitute that she prepared. That was one of the big issues that I had with was when you, uh, under the previous version as you signed, if you weren't in the county you resided in, your signature wouldn't be counted. And I appreciate her making those accommodations to be able to make sure that anybody who signs a packet, it still would be counted. Um, but there's still …
H.B. 82 Judgment Information Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Jan 23, 2026
Moved that the committee favorably recommend HB 82 to the House floor.
▶ Watch at 12:19Read what they said
Thank you Madam Chair. Um, I like to make a motion that we favorably recommend, um, what's the bill number? 82 82 HB 82, uh, to the house floor.
H.B. 186 Judicial Conduct Commission Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Jan 23, 2026
Asks how much detail the commission includes in its reports on resolved complaints.
▶ Watch at 55:29Read what they said
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have one question, um, just to do with the grandma and the privacy of the records. So when you make your reports for the commission, how much detail do you put in them for once a case is resolved? Like, does the commission actually report, Hey, you know, we had a, a complaint of this specific thing, or do you not even know what the complaint is on, on the com on the report? I'm, I'm excited to hear about this. It's been very enlightening. I'm glad that there's something like this, but just outta curiosity. Yeah, please.
H.B. 186 Judicial Conduct Commission Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Jan 23, 2026
Asks whether the public can find out whether a judge was found to have done wrong after a complaint is resolved.
▶ Watch at 59:15Read what they said
Okay. Follow up if you don't mind. Um, what I mean is when you have, um, a case resolved, is there any information that the public would be able to access, um, to know, you know, if you found wrongdoing or not? I just know so many people when it's time for retention, judge elections, um, sometimes people feel like they can't find anything on the judge or they don't know how, um, to vote. And so I was just wondering, you know, once it's resolved, is there information for wrongdoing or, um,
H.B. 186 Judicial Conduct Commission Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Jan 23, 2026
Confirms that public reprimands and sanctions go to the Supreme Court and are published, and that the reprimand information would be public.
▶ Watch at 1:00:28Read what they said
I see. Okay. Thank You. And correct me if I'm wrong, Alex, if we move forward with a public reprimand or any sanction above that, that would go to the Supreme Court, but then they would publish that in the, in the Journ, the Bar Journal. Um, and and those information that, that we put in the, the, the sanction, the, the reprimand would be public? That's correct. Okay. Thank you.
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Loubet moved to adopt House Amendment 1.
▶ Watch at 1:54:32Read what they said
Excellent. So I'd like to make a motion, Mr. Chair, to adopt house amendment one in my name.
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Loubet praised the sponsor's substitute and said the amendment classifies additional citizenship-verification information as private, limited to verifying citizenship for voting.
▶ Watch at 1:55:05Read what they said
Could I speak to it briefly? You please Go ahead. Okay, Great. So I just want to commend the bill sponsor for the efforts that he's made to try to, uh, accommodate all the various interests. Um, I appreciate what you've done with sub one. Um, one of the concerns that I still had was, uh, when it comes to the private records, you did a good job of making sure that this stuff, uh, identified for proof of citizenship was classified as private, but there was, uh, additional information that we also wanted to be protected. So it's still limited to the purpose of verifying whether or not a person is, uh, uh, a US citizen for purposes of …
From the official recordings' automatic captions, with speakers and summaries identified by AI. Use the ▶ links to check the recording before you rely on a quote.