It is day 54 of the 60 day Kentucky General Assembly regular session.

As lawmakers near the finish line, several bills are trying to beat the buzzer.

That includes an effort to strengthen Kentucky's laws banning child marriage.

Also advancing a bill looking to rein in a governor's pardoning powers.

Our Mckenzi spank kicks off tonight's legislative coverage from Frankfurt.

Senator Julie Rocky Adams passed legislation in 2018 which outlawed marriage for children under 18, with exceptions in cases deemed appropriate by a judge.

She says judges have not been following the law.

So her Senate Bill 156 would ban all minors from getting married.

Some lawmakers still had questions about potential outstanding circumstances, but I'm.

Wondering if there's a situation where there is a 17 year old young lady who is pregnant and wishes to marry the father.

Of her baby.

How would that be handled?

If she is emancipated, then she would be afforded all the rights and privileges of an adult.

And so that is handled differently.

Because she would be considered an adult, she could enter into a contract.

She could find a place, you know, sign a lease.

And so that would be different if she is, 17 years old and pregnant.

She would not be allowed to get married, until she turns 18.

The reason is, that pregnant 17 year old would be afforded more legal status as a minor than she would as a married person under age.

Donna Simmons has been working with Senator Rocky Adams on this issue for over eight years.

When she was 16 years old, her mother consented for her to marry a 31 year old.

She says married minors lose important legal protection.

Going back to my own lived experience when I was 16 and I had the miscarriage, I was not able to consent to my own medical care as a married minor.

So many survivors have shared the same experience.

They didn't have access to child protective services because they're no longer considered a minor, but they also do not have enumerated rights as an adult.

So they fall in this legal gray area without any protection.

Senate Bill 156 passed the House Families and Children Committee unanimously and now awaits action by the full House in the House Committee on Elections, Constitutional Amendments and Intergovernmental Affairs.

Lawmakers passed Senate Bill ten, which would put a constitutional amendment on this year's ballot regarding the governor's ability to pardon criminals.

This amendment does not do away with the power of pardon.

It simply restricts that power during the 60 days prior to an election, and in between a gubernatorial election and swearing in.

In essence, 90 days out of every four years, there is no power to pardon vested in the governor.

There will be no more hiding in the darkness of the last minute of an administration.

There will be no more allowing the rich and powerful to influence the scales of justice, without recourse from voters of the Commonwealth.

Former Republican Kentucky Governor Matt Bevin issued several controversial pardons near the end of his tenure, including child sex offenders and convicted murderers.

Supporters of Senate Bill ten say pardons at the 11th hour of a governor's term don't face the accountability of the voting public.

I think if a chief executive at the state or national level has got the courage to do a pardon in the first three and a half years of their administration, that's probably a good pardon, because they're going to face scrutiny from the voters, scrutiny from the media, never accountability.

But as you get closer to that date of leaving office, I think the opportunity for misjudgment and sole person judgment increases.

Senate Bill ten passed unanimously out of its House committee.

It will head to the House floor next for consideration and possibly final passage if there are no changes to the bill.

It passed with 36 yes votes and one passed vote in the Senate.

For Kentucky edition, I'm Mackenzie Spink.

Many thanks.

Mackenzie.

House resolution 126 also passed the House Families and Children Committee today.

It would urge the federal government to provide solutions for the so-called benefits cliff, where those on public assistance lose their benefits but don't yet have their income or other supports to survive.