Latest news with #CharlesSchwertner
Yahoo
3 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Brazos Co. case leads to new law about peace officer attacks
Austin, Tx (FOX 44) – A 2022 Brazos County case involving two peace officers being shot has led to a new law with strong penalties for trying to kill police. State Senator Charles Schwertner said the need for the legislation which increases the penalties for attempted capital murder of a police officer was brought to his attention by Brazos County District Attorney Jarvis Parsons. State Representative Paul Dyson of Bryan was also told about the problem, leading to the writing of what became House Bill 1871. The bill passed by the legislature not only increases the punishment for the offense but also modifies parole. In December 2022, a man shot a Bryan officer, stole their patrol vehicle, and later shot a Brazos County sheriff's deputy during a standoff. Fortunately, both officers survived. In 2024, that man was found guilty of aggravated assault of a public servant. Senator Schwertner said the ultimately exposed a serious gap in our legal system. Current Texas law treats both attempted capital murder of a peace officer and aggravated assault of a public servant as first degree felonies. However, proving attempted capital murder is a more difficult task, requiring the prosecution to prove the offender's intent to kill. As a result, prosecutors could have been discouraged from pursuing attempted capital murder, and instead pursue aggravated assault, even after an attempt to take an officer's life. House Bill 1871 addresses this issue by enhancing the punishment for attempted capital murder of a peace officer, ensuring that the law better reflects the seriousness of this crime and provides a more appropriate deterrent. The bill also includes provisions that adjust parole eligibility and restrict mandatory supervision for individuals convicted under this offense, emphasizing the state's commitment to protecting peace officers who risk their lives in the line of duty. 'HB 1871 increases the punishment for criminals who do everything in their power to murder police officers in the line of duty and attempt to take law enforcement away from their family and friends,' said Brazos District Attorney Jarvis Parsons 'It increases the punishment for Attempted Capital Murder of a Peace Officer from a minimum of probation to a minimum of 25 years in prison up to life in prison with no parole. This increased punishment sends a vital message that as Texans we will protect the people who protect us.' 'Every day, Texas peace officers put their lives on the line to protect our communities,' said Senator Charles Schwertner. 'House Bill 1871 sends a clear message: if you attempt to kill a law enforcement officer, you will face the full weight of the law.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Legislature OKs bill requiring sheriffs to partner with federal authorities to enforce immigration laws
AUSTIN (Nexstar) — The Texas legislature gave the final approval of Senate Bill 8, which will require almost every single county in the state to partner with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to enforce federal immigration laws. It's a move supporters say will keep Texans safe while aligning the state with the Trump administration on strict immigration enforcement. Opponents argue it could lead to overcrowding in jails, a chilling effect on reporting crimes, and racial profiling in minority communities. After going through various changes throughout the legislative process, lawmakers in both chambers finally came to an agreement on the final language of the bill a day before a deadline that would have killed the bill before getting to the governor's desk. SB 8 would require every sheriffs department in a county that operates a jail, or contracts with a private jail, to enter into an agreement with ICE known as 287(g). Currently in Texas there are 234 counties that this bill applies to, according to the bill's author State Sen. Charles Schwertner, R-Georgetown. 'Texas needs to be much more proactive in identifying, detaining, prosecuting and deporting criminal illegal aliens,' Schwertner said. The 287(g) program allows sheriff's deputies to assume some ICE duties, like questioning migrants, issuing warrants or arresting them for immigration violations, depending on their specific training. There are three models within the 287(g) program a law enforcement agency can enter into. They include: Jail Enforcement Model – allows officers to question people to determine immigration status, put their information into a Homeland Security database, take statements and begin the deportation process with an immigration detainer and notice to appear. Warrant Service Officer – a narrower scope than jail enforcement, with officers identifying people as non-citizens during the booking process, referring those people to ICE for evaluation and possible deportation, and serving ICE administrative warrants on people in their custody, according to the ACLU. Task Force Model – described by ICE as a 'force multiplier,' allowing local officers to enforce immigration laws during their routine duties in the community. The final version of the bill gives discretion to sheriffs to decide which of the three models it will enter into with ICE. Sheriffs could decide to enter into more than one type of model, but it is not required to have more than one. It also provides a grant program to help counties cover the cost of training staff or operating the program. The grant amount ranges between $80,000 and $140,000 depending on the size of the county. In laying out the bill on the Senate floor, Schwertner said it sends a clear message. 'Texas will not tolerate criminal illegal aliens threatening our communities,' Schwertner said. But Democratic members in the Senate raised concerns with the bill. It passed along party lines in the Senate. Opponents of the 287(g) program have argued the incorporation of local law enforcement in federal immigration enforcement will lead many people to not call in the case of emergency out of fear it could lead to them or their family being deported. 'That's an issue that I have, that we're going to potentially drive immigrants into the shadows, and you know, make them victims, or have them a bull's eye of potential crimes,' State Sen. José Menéndez, D – San Antonio, said to Schwertner on the Senate floor. Schwertner argued it would not prevent lawfully present citizens from calling the police in an emergency. 'The people of the United States and of Texas spoke very clearly last November regarding their concerns of illegal immigration and the concerns of criminal illegal aliens doing great harm to communities,' Schwertner said. But Menéndez pointed there are some families with mixed status, where the parents may not lawfully be in the country but their children are. 'If people understand that that family, there's an undocumented person, they have a target now, because people know, well, they won't call the police because there's an undocumented person in that household,' Menéndez explained. Another concern is the capacity in Texas jails. The 287(g) program would require counties place an immigration detainer on an inmate that is deemed to be in the country illegally. Opponents argue this would be costly for counties to hold on to somebody in the jail and wait for federal immigration officials to pick them up. There's also an issue of space. According to data from the Texas Commission on Jail Standards, between January and February this year there were 7,481 inmates in Texas jails with an immigration detainer placed on them. Those inmates spent a total of 156,494 days in jail, which averages out to about 21 days per inmate in jail. The total cost to the state is estimated to be more than $14 million, according to the data. 'What are we going to do when these jails must have a 287(g) agreement with the federal government to hold people who are not rapists, murderers or people who have been involved in aggravated assault, they are just people who are not here legally,' State Sen. Sarah Eckhardt, D – Austin, said to Schwertner on the Senate floor. 'They are criminals, in the sense they are illegal aliens. The program does allow for expedite transfer to ICE to properly adjudicate those individuals,' Schwertner responded. Many opponents to the bill have pointed out concerns with the task force model within the 287(g) program. That model, as Schwertner explained, allows non-federal law enforcement, such as sheriff's deputies, to enforce immigration laws within the community as opposed to inside a jail. Some believe it will lead to racial profiling in minority communities. 'Are you not afraid of the potentiality for racial profiling by police if they see what presumably looks like Mexican or Hispanic people in a truck that they will not be pulled over simply because of the color of their skin,' State Sen. Roland Gutierrez, D-San Antonio, asked Schwertner. Schwertner agreed racial biases do exist in the world, but argued the sheriffs department and ICE would have oversight on who they place in a task force model. 'Through the 287(g) program task force model, there is training to address the concerns of racial profiling, there are procedures,' Schwertner said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Effort to curb personal injury lawsuit payouts dies in the Texas Legislature
Legislation that started as a priority bill to place substantial limits on the personal injury lawsuit industry — those representing accident victims and their families — died this weekend after lawmakers failed to agree on a final version ahead of the deadline. The bill's end came after it had already been pared down to an unrecognizable version that only required disclosure of referrals between lawyers and health care providers. The failure to pass the bill marked a significant defeat for Texans for Lawsuit Reform, a major business-friendly lobbying group in the Texas Legislature. Senate Bill 30, by Sen. Charles Schwertner, sought to limit the amount of damages accident victims could claim by creating specific guidelines around what evidence juries were allowed to consider, and tied the amount of money juries could award to certain thresholds, such as a 150% of what Medicare paid for that service, among others. The goal of the bill, according to the author, was to curb 'nuclear verdicts' — ones that award victims $10 million or more. Company owners testified at an April committee hearing that such lawsuits drive up the cost of doing business in Texas. Lee Parsley, president of Texans for Lawsuit Reform, said the group was disappointed the Legislature did not pass a bill they see as 'necessary to stop this well-documented, barely hidden abuse of our legal system.' 'Today, a kind of fraud is occurring in courtrooms across Texas, as personal injury attorneys and collaborative doctors manufacture medical bills and present them to jurors as if they are legitimate,' he said in a statement. 'This unethical activity is increasing insurance premiums for every business operating in our state. Ultimately, the increased cost of doing business is paid by every Texan. The bill passed the Senate 20-11 in mid-April. The House also passed the bill 87-51 in late May, but with significant changes that the Senate refused to agree on. The House version also added an amendment by Reps. Mitch Little, a Republican from Lewisville, and Joe Moody, a Democrat from El Paso that gave juries discretion to decide what evidence was relevant — a change that House sponsor Greg Bonnen argued defeated the purpose of the bill. For the Texas Trial Lawyers Association, which opposed the bill, that was a win: 'This moment serves as an important reminder that protecting our civil justice system requires ongoing care and attention,' Jack Walker, president of the group, said. The bill failed despite being one of Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick's priorities, alongside Senate Bill 39, which was specific to curbing payouts from lawsuits against commercial vehicle owners, including trucking companies. SB 30 made it to the final legislative stages despite strong opposition from some conservative activists who previously supported the group's efforts on restricting medical malpractice lawsuits. But the group's influence has waned, especially after backing a rival candidate to Attorney General Ken Paxton. One of Paxton's lawyers in his impeachment trial was Little, who was appointed to the conference committee. Cody Dishon, a trial lawyer who says the bill spurred him to begin paying attention to the Legislature, was glad to see the bill outcome: 'People from all walks of life have voiced strong opposition to the controversial SB 30, including a former trial judge with 16 years on the bench, medical doctors and healthcare professionals, survivors of sexual assault, conservatives and democrats, defense attorneys, and families who have lost loved ones due to corporate negligence.' First round of TribFest speakers announced! Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Maureen Dowd; U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-San Antonio; Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker; U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California; and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Dallas are taking the stage Nov. 13–15 in Austin. Get your tickets today!
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
New limits for personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits may become a reality in Texas
A proposal to limit how much an accident victim can recover in lawsuits for medical care won preliminary approval from the Texas House on Monday, but not without changes that leave open monetary awards beyond medical bills and preserve the court's ability to decide what evidence is relevant. The bill passed 94-52 on Monday with the support of at least five Democrats. Senate Bill 30, authored by Georgetown Republican Sen. Charles Schwertner, intends to curb 'nuclear verdicts,' or jury rulings that award victims more than $10 million, which proponents say makes doing business in Texas unpredictable. If the proposal becomes law, those who sue in personal injury or wrongful death cases can submit only the amount paid for medical services, and directs juries to limit the amount of damages based on a set of options such as the maximum that can be charged to Medicare. The bill was a priority of Texans for Lawsuit Reform, a well-funded group representing oil and energy companies that has spent the last two decades trying to curb what they see as frivolous lawsuits. For the bill to become law, the House must vote on it again. Then the Senate must agree to changes, or request a committee hash out differences. At a committee hearing in April, business owners shared their experiences of getting sued in accidents where the damage appeared minimal — according to poster-sized photos they brought to the hearing — but the damages sought were in the millions. Opponents argued that there's already an appeals process in the civil lawsuit process that parties can use to reduce the damages owed. The bill overcame resistance from some conservative activists who previously supported the efforts by Texas for Lawsuit Reform's namely, restricting medical malpractice lawsuits. The version of the bill that passed the House removed language that drew concern from opponents, such as a provision that would have barred juries from awarding money for 'noneconomic damages' such as mental anguish. That was raised by some accident victims and sexual assault survivors who said the impacts of their injuries could not be placed neatly into the economic damage categories the previous version of the bill outlined. On the House floor Monday, lawmakers also approved an amendment by Rep. Greg Bonnen, R-Friendsburg, who is carrying the bill in the House, to remove a portion of the bill that would have only allowed damages on services that have health care industry billing codes, which not all services an accident victim needs would have. Another Bonnen amendment changed the requirement for an itemized list by the provider of a plaintiff to a summary list. Lawmakers unsuccessfully tried to further narrow that requirement, though an amendment by Rep. Matt Morgan, R-Richmond, reaffirming privacy protections between doctors and patients, and attorneys and clients was adopted. A pair of amendments by Reps. Mitch Little, a Lewisville Republican, and Joe Moody, an El Paso Democrat, also passed, over the objection of Bonnen, to no longer require some evidence related to medical history be automatically admitted. The amended bill leaves it to a judge to decide whether the evidence is relevant – something Bonnen said defeated the purpose of that part of the bill. The Texas Trial Lawyers Association, which lobbied for months against the bill, said the changes since it was first introduced were a sign of how Texans felt about efforts to curb lawsuits. 'This result sends a clear message that Texans of all walks of life support the fundamental value of accountability embodied in our civil justice system,' Jack Walker, president of the association, said in a statement. Disclosure: Texans for Lawsuit Reform and Texas Trial Lawyers Association have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here. First round of TribFest speakers announced! Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Maureen Dowd; U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-San Antonio; Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker; U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California; and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Dallas are taking the stage Nov. 13–15 in Austin. Get your tickets today!
Coin Geek
26-05-2025
- Business
- Coin Geek
US lawmakers of the Texas House pass Bitcoin Reserve bill
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready... Lawmakers from the Texas House of Representatives have voted overwhelmingly to pass Senate Bill 21 (SB 21), which allows for establishing a Bitcoin reserve managed by the state comptroller and investing in select digital currencies. The legislation would allow the comptroller to invest in any digital asset with a market cap above $500 billion over the previous 12-month period. Currently, the only asset fitting this description is Bitcoin. Authored by Republican Senator Charles Schwertner of Georgetown in February 2025, SB 21 was passed by the Texas Senate in a March 6 vote of 25-5, after which it progressed to a House vote. The bill eventually passed the House on its third reading in a 101-42 vote and will now go to Texas Governor Greg Abbott to either sign into law or veto. However, the latter scenario seems unlikely as the governor has previously been vocal in supporting the digital asset space, to the point of wanting to make Texas a digital asset hub. After hosting the Texas Blockchain conference in October 2021, Abbot posted on X that the state 'will be #1 for blockchain & cryptocurrency.' If the governor does rubber stamp SB 21, Texas will become the third U.S. state to pass Bitcoin reserve legislation, following in the footsteps of New Hampshire and Arizona. According to digital asset legislation tracking site Bitcoin Laws, 47 strategic Bitcoin reserve bills have been introduced in 26 states, with 13 active bills at the federal level as well. This nationwide move towards Bitcoin reserves is very much in keeping with Government policy since the re-election of U.S. President Donald Trump in November 2024. After taking office in January, Trump began a process of transforming the U.S. into a more hospitable environment for digital assets, including reversing so-called crypto-debanking measures, installing crypto-advocates in key regulatory positions—while hamstringing other regulators—and making a strategic Bitcoin reserve. On March 7, Trump officially announced that the U.S. would be creating a strategic Bitcoin reserve through an executive order titled 'Establishment of the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and United States Digital Asset Stockpile.' The order introduced the idea of a strategic reserve exclusively for BTC—addressing the concerns of some industry supporters when Trump first posited a digital asset reserve on March 2 that would include XRP, SOL, and ADA—as well as introducing the concept of a 'Digital Asset Stockpile,' to be comprised of various cryptocurrencies. Watch | Bitcoin mining in 2025: Is it still worth it? title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen="">
