What does it mean when a bill is “Discharged to the committee on JUDICIARY”

I am tracking a bill and noticed that it moved from the Joint Committee of Policy and Steerting to Discharged to the committee on JUDICIARY. What does this mean? Can anyone help?

This post was originally published with Soapblox and contains additional formatting and metadata.
View archived version of this post
.



Discuss

12 Comments . Leave a comment below.
  1. Lawyers and Judges and Courts, oh my!

    I'm not sure I understand your question. What don't you understand?

    Judiciary is: having to do with the legal system. Judges, etc, that sort of thing. Your bill's gone from one committee (whose title, Policy and Steering, is pretty self-evident) to another one on courts and judges and whatnot.

    Does this help?

    Now as to the "discharged" bit, I don't really know what that means -- whether it means that they approved of the bill or whether they said, "This isn't our domain" and gave it a pass. Anybody know?

  2. First - you should supply the bill's number and topic here - and

    It means that the first committee determined that the bill's primary content affects the judicial branch.  Now, the bill number please!

  3. amberpaw is right again............

    It means that the first committee determined that the bill's primary content affects the judicial branch. 

    Happens quite often. A bill gets assigned to the wrong committee. Every Joint Committee reviews bills that affect a specific section of the law -- local government, mental health, children and families, economic development, judiciary etc etc.

    You can find all the Joint Committees, their members and the list of bills they are considering, or have already disposed of, on the Legislature's website. Here's what they say about the Judiciary

    It shall be the duty of the committee on Judiciary to consider all matters concerning crimes, penalties and sentencing, criminal offender record information, judiciary, including the recall of judges, the salaries ofjudges, court clerks and court officers of the various courts, probation officers, juries and jury duty, parole, registers of deeds, Correction issues previously sent to Public Safety (but excluding the retirement of judges and all other court personnel) and such other matters as may be referred.

     

  4. It Means You're Screwed

    time to meet Knuckles O'Flaherty

    eb3-fka-ernie-boch-iii   @   Tue 4 Dec 7:00 PM
    • Thank you for saying it, EB - falling into Gino's maw is usually a death knell...

      • Not so!

        Letters and calls moved H4321 [the 2003-2004 session] then H992 [the 2005 session] forward with a favorable recommend - of course then they died in Ways and Means.  If our listmate wants help and concrete pointers, then we need the bill number so we can read it and suggest constituencies and so forth who could pay attention to it.  S999 was also reported out favorably in February from Judiciary.  All these bills deal with indigent defense, which is one of my top areas of interest and expertise.

        Of course, I was able to mobilize several hundred calls and letters due to the content of those two bills.  THAT does make a difference.  And some of those calls and letters were Chairman O'Flaherty's neighbors and constituents.  You know, of course, that Eugene O'Flaherty also has a law office in Somerville, yes?  

        I actually find him friendly and accessible - but then there is mutual respect.  I understand how hard he works and what he actually does and is trying to do because I took the time to listen.

        Not sure why the juvenile name calling, above in this thread!

        • Like the the Line in a $quot;Bronx Tale$quot;..

          What's O'Flaherty ever done for me?

          eb3-fka-ernie-boch-iii   @   Tue 4 Dec 7:00 PM
  5. Well I want the bill to fail actually

    I actually want the bill to fail since it go against everything I spent 6 years of my life researching. Its H4434 and its looking to expand the drug war adding two new plants. I have been researching and looking for ways to revert our nations policies towards ending prohibition and instead investing in treatment since addiction is more of a medical condition as apposed to a crime. Also, the drug war makes a market and it creates gangs who in turn cause violence, people to commite crimes, etc. Think of how much money our nation wastes on this stupid war. Take for instance the City of Syracuse NY. Their auditor states that most of their budget goes to fight the drug war, hence less money for schools, healthcare, roads, etc. That's why I want this bill to die since its expanding a policy that has crippled our country.

    • A Standard Rule at the State House

      There are a thousand ways to kill a bill Only one way to pass it.

      So the odds are with you.

      Call the Judiciary Committee and ask for the staff person in charge of the bill and go in and give her/him all your information, and ask to be notified when she/he schedules the hearing.  

    • Thank you for the bill number

      As well as your position on it.  I agree that drug addiction is a treatable condition, not in general a crime [though addiction may "fuel" crimes like theft and more].  In 2002, there were 1000 treatment beds.  Gov. Romney cut this to 500 - leading to an increase in the child welfare case load, the criminal  case load, and incarceration.

      Similarly, in closing and reducing the  number of mental health treatment beds, and community mental health centers and slots, the rate of incarceration went up.  If H 4434 fuels incarceration and further reduces treatment options, I may well join you in opposing it.  As I said, I will pull the bill and read it now that I know which one it is - and why you oppose it.

« Blue Mass Group Front Page

Add Your Comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Wed 22 Oct 7:55 PM