Latest news with #SenateCommitteeonStateAffairs
Yahoo
11-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Texas bill would prevent State Fair of Texas from prohibiting firearms
The Brief Texas Senate bill 1065 aims to keep the State Fair of Texas from imposing a firearms ban. If passed, the bill would allow license-to-carry holders to bring firearms to the Fair and other places where a contractor leases government property. Last year, in response to the 2023 shooting, the Fair said nobody could bring a firearm, unless they were current or retired law enforcement members. DALLAS - State senators heard testimony on a bill that could ban events like the State Fair of Texas from prohibiting firearms. Texas Senate Bill 1065 aims to keep the State Fair of Texas from imposing a firearms ban. The bill went before the Senate Committee on State Affairs on Thursday morning. If passed, the bill would allow license-to-carry holders to bring firearms to the Fair and other places where a contractor leases government property. The State Fair leases Fair Park from the city of Dallas. The bill is in its early stages, but the debate has been ongoing. It was introduced by Republican Senator Bob Hall, who represents parts of North Texas outside of Dallas. What they're saying License to Carry instructor, Gary Zimmerman, believes the problem isn't just the right to carry at the State Fair, but rather the protection needed to get there. "The Texas State Fair is in a high crime rate area of Dallas and the problem isn't the State Fair, because there's 500-plus police officers there, it's getting to and from there," said Zimmerman. "Where are you going to put your gun? In the car. Where's the number one place where criminals obtain guns? It's from stealing them from cars, it's not from buying them, they steal them from cars." Executive Director of the Texas State Rifle Association, John Poole, did not approve of the State Fair changing its gun policy after a shooting in 2023. "The knee-jerk reaction by the State Fair was a policy change that not only banned all weapons, but it banned the very people that you want to carry a handgun," said Poole. The other side Opponents of the bill believe it would undermine the ability of the State Fair and other organizations leasing government property to keep events safe. Sarah West, a volunteer for Moms Demand Action, an organization fighting for more public safety measures that protect people from gun violence, said during Thursday's hearing that Senate Bill 1065 strips event organizers of the flexibility needed to make public events safe. "SB 1065 imposes a one-size-fits-all gun mandate on settings as varied as public streets, the Houston Zoo, and public universities. It strips event organizers of the flexibility they need to make site-specific safety decisions," said West. FOX 4 reached out to the State Fair of Texas for comment on SB 1065 and received the following reply: "Yes, the State Fair of Texas is aware of Senate Bill 1065. The State Fair takes no political position on gun rights issues and in fact, has long been, and continues to be, a strong supporter of the rights of responsible gun owning Texans. Our decision to change our policy regarding the admission of license-to-carry (LTC) holders with their handguns was in no way meant to be a political statement. It was merely an attempt to 1) make the Fair safer for everyone; 2) follow best practices of similar Texas events; and 3) eliminate confusion related to areas of the fairgrounds where firearms are prohibited by has been suggested that our new policy makes the State Fair a "gun free" zone and therefore less safe than before. We disagree with this suggestion. The State Fair has adopted a similar policy to that of most all similar events in Texas, such as athletic competitions, concerts, and other fairs and festivals throughout the state." Dig deeper In 2023, a shooting inside the food court on the fairgrounds injured three people. At the time, the Fair allowed attendees with valid handgun licenses to carry their weapon if it was concealed. The suspect did not have a gun license. Last year, in response to the 2023 shooting, the Fair said nobody could bring a firearm, unless they were current or retired law enforcement members. Last fall, the Texas Supreme Court denied Attorney General Ken Paxton's emergency filing which sought to overturn the State Fair's gun ban. What's next It's unclear if Senate Bill 1065 has the support needed to become law. The bill is left pending at this time, so no action has been taken. The Source Information in this article comes from a hearing of the Texas Senate State Affairs Committee, the State Fair of Texas and past FOX 4 coverage.
Yahoo
28-03-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Amid support from doctors group, bill to clarify Texas' abortion ban does little to save lives, critics say
A bipartisan bill to clarify exceptions to the state's near-total abortion ban garnered widespread support Thursday from health care professionals and abortion opponents who said the bill would remove any hesitation doctors might have to save a pregnant woman's life. Critics, meanwhile, told lawmakers that Senate Bill 31 doesn't go far enough to protect women facing pregnancy-related medical emergencies and even quietly resurrects 160-year-old laws that could be used to criminalize those who have undergone an abortion or have helped those who receive an out-of-state abortion. At a state Senate committee hearing Thursday, SB 31's author Sen. Bryan Hughes, R-Mineola, said Texas law already creates a medical exception to the state's abortion ban, allowing doctors to intervene when the life of a pregnant patient is at risk. The proposed legislation, Hughes said, simply reiterates that exception and 'removes any question and hesitation' among doctors and hospitals about when they can provide medical care to pregnant patients. 'There's a mom and there's a baby, and we want to love and respect and protect them both,' Hughes said during the Senate Committee on State Affairs hearing. 'That's what this is really about.' At least three women have died and dozens more have shared stories of medical care delayed or denied since Texas banned nearly all abortions after the overturn of Roe v. Wade in 2022. The law as currently written allows a doctor to perform an abortion to save the life of a pregnant patient, but with stiff penalties for violations — life in prison, hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines and the loss of their medical license — doctors have been unsure of when they can safely intervene. SB 31, called the Life of the Mother Act, would not expand access to abortion or modify the existing near-total bans. Instead, it purports to better explain when doctors can intervene to perform a medically necessary abortion. The bill would more clearly explain that doctors can remove an ectopic pregnancy or the remains of a fetus after a miscarriage, and aligns the definition of a medical emergency with existing state law. It also clarifies that doctors and lawyers can talk with a patient about a medically necessary abortion without running afoul of the law. The bill also states that doctors are not required to delay, alter or withhold life-saving medical treatment to try to preserve the life of the fetus, and brings into state law previous guidance from the Texas Supreme Court, which ruled that nothing in the law required the medical emergency to be imminent or irreversible before a doctor could intervene. It also proposes continuing education requirements for lawyers and doctors to better educate them on interpreting and applying these laws. The bill has garnered bipartisan support from Democratic lawmakers, anti-abortion groups, medical associations, doctors and other health care providers. Medical practitioners and pro-life advocates worked together on the language of the bill, according to Lisa Kaufman, executive director and general counsel for the Texas Civil Justice League, one of the organizations that helped draft the bill. Kaufman said SB 31 would provide doctors with the confidence they need to act in a timely manner. 'There has been a breakdown of the implementation of pro-life law and we want to address that here with Senate Bill 31,' said John Seago, president of Texas Right to Life and one of a handful of individuals invited to testify for the proposed legislation. The bill would also help recruit and retain the OB-GYN workforce, said Julie Ayala, an East Texas doctor who testified on behalf of herself and the Texas Medical Association. One in five Texas OB-GYNs have considered leaving Texas and 13% are planning to retire early because of the state's abortion laws, according to a Manatt Health survey published in October 2024. While the bill has the support of some doctors, some Texas mothers and University of Texas at Austin law students voiced opposition to the bill on Thursday, saying it does little to protect women and could dissuade young people from starting families in Texas. Amanda Zurawski, who sued Texas over its abortion laws after doctors refused to end her nonviable pregnancy, questioned whether SB 31 would have allowed for a different outcome in her situation. Zurawski was 18 weeks pregnant when she experienced preterm prelabor rupture of membranes, a condition that is fatal to the fetus and poses significant risks to the pregnant patient. Zurawski went into sepsis and spent three days in the intensive care unit. 'It is unclear whether Senate Bill 31 would have prevented my trauma and preserved my fertility had it existed in 2022,' Zurawski said, pointing out that the bill does not include specific language about fetal anomalies. 'I do believe the bill comes from a place of concern, but I believe the bill is flawed and should be improved.' Mary Rolfson Taylor, a law student at the University of Texas at Austin, told lawmakers about her experience with an ectopic pregnancy that ultimately led her to undergo an emergency surgery to remove part of her fallopian tube. SB 31 includes a requirement that physicians document the gestational age and location of the fetus to diagnose an ectopic pregnancy before providing an abortion-inducing drug, a provision that Taylor said could force doctors to delay providing life-saving care. 'I, to this day, don't know my fetus' gestational age and did not know the location of the fetus until after the surgery,' Taylor said. SB 31 states that physicians can perform an abortion on a patient who faces 'a serious risk of substantial impairment to a major bodily function,' but does not clarify what exactly that means, said Karly Bruder, a law student at the University of Texas at Austin who also testified against the bill. Bruder and others told lawmakers that Texas' abortion ban has led people to leave the state out of fear of what kind of care they can expect if they become pregnant. 'Doctors and health care professionals are leaving the state in droves because they are afraid,' said another University of Texas at Austin law student, Gwynn Marotta. 'There is a maternal health care crisis taking place and pregnant people will continue to die… the blood is on your hands because of these bans and because of these bills.' Bruder was one of several at the hearing who also raised concerns that the bill would breathe new life into an unresolved legal question about the status of Texas' pre-Roe abortion laws. Texas' current abortion laws prohibit criminalizing or otherwise going after the person who undergoes the abortion. But, the pre-Roe statutes leave the door open to criminalizing the person who terminated their pregnancy, and criminalizes anyone who 'furnishes the means' for an illegal abortion. Texas' abortion funds — nonprofit groups that help pay for out-of-state abortions — have argued in court that this clause could be used to pursue criminal charges against them. These laws, originally written in the 1800s, were put on ice by the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Roe v. Wade. They remained on the books but unenforced for almost 50 years. In 2004, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the laws were 'repealed by implication,' a ruling that a federal district judge reiterated in 2023. But Attorney General Ken Paxton, conservative lawmakers and anti-abortion attorneys argue these pre-Roe statutes went back into effect as soon as Roe was overturned. There was a lawsuit challenging this question in court immediately after the decision, but it was never fully resolved. SB 31's clarifying language would apply to the pre-Roe statutes, as well as the more recent bans, raising concerns from some reproductive rights advocates that it's a backdoor attempt to more fully revive these laws. Elizabeth Sepper, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin, said she's skeptical that Republican lawmakers see that as a necessary step, since they believe these laws are fully in effect. 'If they didn't include language about the pre-Roe statute, then I think we would have tons of resistance from people who are concerned about reassuring doctors, because then they're still going to worry that they could face enforcement under the pre-Roe law,' she said. 'I don't see this as a meaningful step to change the status of that law.' A companion bill, House Bill 44, has not yet been scheduled for a committee hearing. The committee also heard clashing testimony on two other bills cracking down on abortion pills, out-of-state travel and other ways Texans are evading the abortion ban. Disclosure: Texas Civil Justice League, Texas Medical Association and University of Texas at Austin 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. We can't wait to welcome you to the 15th annual Texas Tribune Festival, Texas' breakout ideas and politics event happening Nov. 13–15 in downtown Austin. Step inside the conversations shaping the future of education, the economy, health care, energy, technology, public safety, culture, the arts and so much more. Hear from our CEO, Sonal Shah, on TribFest 2025. TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.
Yahoo
21-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Come and take it? Texas lawmaker pushes to recognize cannon as official state gun
AUSTIN (KFDX/KJTL) — An East Texas lawmaker is trying to make the cannon the official state gun of Texas. Senator Bryan Hughes filed Senate Concurrent Resolution 22 this legislative session. The resolution passed the Senate Committee on State Affairs unanimously on Monday, March 17, and is now heading to the Senate floor for a full vote. House Representative Cole Hefner has filed a companion resolution that's identical to Hughes'. But doesn't Texas already have an official gun? In 2021, Senator Charles Schwertner filed SCR 20, recognizing the 1847 Colt Walker pistol as the official handgun of the state. The legislation walked through the halls of the capitol with no pushback. Governor Abbott signed the resolution on May 24, 2021. A simple Google search of 'what is the official gun of Texas', and pops up as the Colt Walker pistol. Let's look at the language in each piece of legislation: Hughes' SCR 22 states: 'WHEREAS, These historic weapons serve as powerful reminders of our state's epic struggle for freedom, and they further highlight the unique heritage shared by all those who are proud to call Texas home; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the 89th Legislature of the State of Texas hereby designate the cannon as the official state gun of Texas. Schwertner's SCR 20 states: WHEREAS, The original 1847 Colt Walker pistol is still the most powerful black powder pistol in existence; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the 87th Legislature of the State of Texas hereby recognize the original 1847 Colt Walker pistol as the official handgun of the State of Texas. Britannica describes a cannon as a big gun, howitzer, or mortar, as distinguished from a musket, rifle, or other small arm. So basically, the cannon and Colt Walker pistol are both guns. Both have been crucial in Texas' history. Perhaps both can carry the Official Gun of Texas title after this legislative session. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
21-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Republican lawmakers revive effort to give attorney general more power to prosecute election crimes
This coverage is made possible through Votebeat, a nonpartisan news organization covering local election administration and voting access. Sign up for Votebeat Texas' free newsletters here. Some Texas Republican lawmakers are reviving a previously stalled effort to expand the Texas attorney general's power to prosecute election crimes. The long-running push is a response to a 2022 ruling from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which found that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's office does not have unilateral authority to independently prosecute criminal cases in trial courts without the request of a local prosecutor. Senate Bill 1026, filed by state Sen. Bryan Hughes, a powerful Republican from Central Texas, would amend the law to require the Texas attorney general's office to prosecute election crimes if no local proceedings have begun after six months. The bill was approved by the GOP-led Senate Committee on State Affairs Thursday. Similar bills have also been filed in the House. Some election and voting rights advocates said they're concerned that the bill, as written, would require Paxton's office to prosecute even if local district attorneys had chosen not to, or didn't find enough evidence to do so. The bill specifically changes the wording of a section of the law that now says the office 'may' prosecute a criminal offense to 'shall.' They warned that the bill seemed aimed at increasing election prosecutions, potentially intimidating voters and local election officials. 'On its own, that is a problem,' said Ashley Harris, staff attorney for the ACLU of Texas. 'It's all part of an attempt to control not only local prosecutors, but also election offices.' Geoff Barr, chief of the election integrity division at the Texas Attorney General's Office, said he interpreted the bill as giving his office discretion. 'If I don't feel that I can prove the case, if the evidence is insufficient, I would argue that that 'shall' does not mandate me to prosecute against my ethical duties,' Barr said during a Senate Committee on State Affairs public hearing last week on the bill. At the hearing, Hughes said lawmakers have been aware of instances where local district attorneys, who are elected, may have conflicts when asked to prosecute alleged election crimes. 'Who knows whether politics or other matters in any given county could affect prosecution?' Hughes said. 'So election law is a matter of paramount statewide importance. This bill is intended to restore the authority the attorney general has had for decades to handle those matters.' Paxton has actively pursued election-related crimes since he took office in 2015. After his office set up the election integrity unit, it has opened more than 300 investigations of suspected crimes by voters — in a state which has more than 18 million voters registered — but has successfully convicted only a handful. Republican lawmakers filed similar bills in 2023, which failed to pass. Those bills came during a legislative session that ended with the House impeaching Paxton over other matters. The Senate later acquitted Paxton of several impeachment articles. The debate over whether the attorney general's office should have such authority was put to the test following the 2018 election of a local sheriff in Jefferson County, where the elected district attorney declined to prosecute alleged campaign-finance violations against Sheriff Zena Stephens. Paxton then obtained an indictment from neighboring Chambers County. In 2021, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals dismissed the indictment. After Paxton asked the court to rehear the case, it upheld its previous ruling, saying the attorney general does not have the independent authority to pursue criminal cases in trial courts unless the local prosecutor asks the office to do so. Paxton later targeted three of the judges who reached that decision when they were up for reelection, successfully leading a campaign to oust them during the 2024 Republican primary. Hughes' bill would explicitly give Paxton's office the authority he sought from the appeals court. Natalia Contreras covers election administration and voting access for Votebeat in partnership with the Texas Tribune. She is based in Corpus Christi. Contact Natalia at ncontreras@ We can't wait to welcome you to the 15th annual Texas Tribune Festival, Texas' breakout ideas and politics event happening Nov. 13–15 in downtown Austin. Step inside the conversations shaping the future of education, the economy, health care, energy, technology, public safety, culture, the arts and so much more. Hear from our CEO, Sonal Shah, on TribFest 2025. TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.
Yahoo
06-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Texas bill would prevent people from certain countries from purchasing land
AUSTIN (KXAN) – On Thursday, the Senate Committee on State Affairs is set to discuss Senate Bill 17, which could preclude residents of certain countries from purchasing real estate in Texas. If passed, SB 17 could block people from countries considered National security threats – like China, Iran, North Korea and Russia – from purchasing agricultural, residential and commercial properties. Residents of these counties who are also lawful United States citizens would still be able to buy property in Texas, according to the bill text. Ahead of the meeting, the Asian Texans for Justice expressed their strong opposition to the bill. 'This bill is nothing more than state-sanctioned discrimination,' Lily Trieu, Co-Executive Director of Asian Texans for Justice, said in a press release. 'SB17 makes a dangerous assumption that anyone from these countries—or who simply looks like they could be—is a threat. It's a policy rooted in fear and xenophobia, and it has no place in Texas,' she continued. SB 17 would give the Texas Attorney General the authority to enforce the law in a district court if a resident of one of the listed countries was suspected of having purchased real estate in Texas. The group suggested that if the bill becomes law, some immigrants residing in the U.S. – students, professionals, or refugees – would be blocked from purchasing agricultural, commercial or investment properties. '[This bill] not only mirrors the racist Alien Land Laws of the past but also paves the way for widespread racial profiling against Asian Americans and immigrant communities,' according to a press release. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
