Implications:

This bill would give families more time to file lawsuits after someone dies due to another person’s fault.

Right now, Louisiana law only allows one year to file

• A survival action (for the pain and suffering the person went through before they died)
• A wrongful death action (for the losses suffered by the family after the death)

This bill would change both deadlines to two years from the date of death.

This gives grieving families more time to prepare and file a case, but it also means defendants and insurers could face lawsuits for a longer period.

HOUSE committee amendments technical

Implications:

To reduce tax costs for insurers, encourage competition, and potentially lower auto insurance premiums for Louisiana residents.

Summary:

Reduces the annual premium tax rate on vehicle insurance policies in Louisiana to ease the tax burden on insurers and potentially lower costs for policyholders.

Current Law:

• Insurers pay a $185 annual tax on gross premiums up to $6,000.
• For premiums above $6,000, insurers pay an additional $300 for each $10,000 or part thereof.

Proposed Change (Effective July 1, 2026):

• The $185 minimum tax remains the same for premiums up to $6,000.
• The additional tax for premiums over $6,000 is reduced from $300 to $200 for each $10,000 or part thereof.
• Applies to policies issued or executed on or after the effective date.

HOUSE committee amendments technical

HOUSE committee amendment [LINK] create the crime of using a drone over a permitted parade or parade route without authorization. Violators face a fine of $2,000–$5,000, up to one year in jail, and forfeiture of the drone. It applies to Mardi Gras, school, and other permitted parades. No-fly zones must be posted, and lack of knowledge is not a defense. Exceptions are made for permitted film or TV production use.

Amends existing laws regarding the unlawful use of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), commonly known as drones. The bill proposes to add specific definitions and authorizes law enforcement agencies to employ certain mitigation measures against drones operating in a "nefarious manner."

Key Provisions of the Bill:

1.    Definitions Introduced:

o  "Mitigation measures" are defined as actions, such as jamming, taken to cause electronic interference to neutralize, intercept, disable, or disrupt a UAS to prevent illegal or harmful activity.

o  "Nefarious manner" refers to the use of a UAS for illegal, dangerous, or harmful purposes, including but not limited to spying, smuggling contraband (as defined in R.S. 14:402), facilitating criminal activity, or posing a direct threat to public safety.

2.    Authorization for Law Enforcement:

o  Law enforcement officers or agencies are permitted to take reasonable and necessary mitigation measures against UAS threats operating in a nefarious manner.

o  Such measures may include detection, tracking, identification methods, and the interception or disabling of a UAS through legal and safe methods, including jamming, hacking, or physical capture.

o  Actions can be taken only if there is reasonable suspicion that the UAS is involved in criminal activity, poses an imminent threat to public safety, or is otherwise operating in violation of state or federal law.

3.    Title of the Act:

o  The bill may be cited as the "We Will Act" Act.

Additionally, the bill directs the Louisiana State Law Institute to alphabetize and renumber the definitions in R.S. 14:337(B) and correct any cross-references as necessary.

This proposed legislation aims to equip law enforcement with clearer authority and tools to address the misuse of drones, enhancing public safety and security.

Seeks to enact R.S. 29:740, a new statute under Louisiana’s emergency preparedness laws (R.S. 29). The bill addresses the release of inmates during a declared state of emergency, imposing strict procedural requirements to prevent unauthorized releases. It targets the Department of Public Safety and Corrections (DPS&C), sheriffs operating parish prisons, and private prison contractors, mandating individualized court orders for any inmate release within an emergency-declared area.

1.    Prohibition on Releases Without Court Order (Section A):

•   During a declared emergency, neither the DPS&C nor local facilities housing inmates (e.g., parish jails) may release inmates unless a court issues an individualized order. This applies specifically to the geographic area under the emergency declaration.

2.    Restriction on Authority (Section B):

•  Courts, sheriffs, private prison contractors, or any other officers are explicitly prohibited from releasing inmates without a court order. Such orders must follow a formal process: a motion must be filed and served upon the district attorney of a parish within the emergency area, ensuring prosecutorial oversight.

3.    Effective Date (Section 2):

•   The law takes effect upon the governor’s signature or, if unsigned, after the constitutional period for bills to become law without a signature (per Article III, Section 18). If vetoed and overridden, it becomes effective the day after legislative approval.

Safeguards public order during chaotic emergency periods. Requiring individualized court orders ensures case-by-case evaluation, preventing mass releases that could overwhelm communities or law enforcement already stretched thin. The involvement of district attorneys adds a layer of prosecutorial scrutiny, likely intended to weigh public safety risks (e.g., releasing violent offenders) against humanitarian needs.

HB 27 is a targeted measure to regulate inmate releases during declared emergencies, emphasizing judicial oversight and public safety. While it addresses a legitimate concern—uncontrolled releases in crises—its strict requirements could strain emergency response systems unless paired with robust implementation plans (e.g., emergency court protocols). If passed, its success will depend on judicial agility and coordination among DPS&C, sheriffs, and courts.

Amends R.S. 29:381 to expand eligibility for Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare facilities in Louisiana. It retains current access for war veterans (discharged honorably, served during U.S. wars including Korea and Vietnam) and other veterans/nonveterans under Title 38, U.S.C., while adding nonveterans, National Guard, and reservists not activated under Title 10, U.S.C. Focused on psychiatric and geriatric care, it broadens state support without altering operations. Effective upon enactment, it enhances veteran-related healthcare access. No fiscal note because it is private pay. It would allow certain veterans to be allowed to stay in a retirement home among other veterans. Jay is running this for the VA.