BILL ANALYSIS

C.S.H.B. 1571

By: Jones, Jolanda

Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence

Committee Report (Substituted)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The bill author has informed the committee that protective orders serve as vital legal protections for victims of family violence, stalking, and other threats, but their effectiveness can be compromised due to communication breakdowns between courts, law enforcement, and legal representatives. The bill author has also informed the committee that inconsistent access to protective order information and gaps between jurisdictions can lead to enforcement failures, leaving victims vulnerable to continued harm. C.S.H.B. 1571, also known as Anthony's Law, seeks to enhance victim protection and ensure better coordination between legal entities, thereby improving the enforcement of protective orders statewide.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT

It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.

ANALYSIS

C.S.H.B. 1571 amends the Government Code to include the following individuals among those who are authorized to access copies of protective orders and protective order applications in the protective order registry maintained by the Office of Court Administration (OCA) and who must be given the ability to search for and receive such copies through the registry's website:

·       an attorney representing a party in a civil action; and

·       a victim of family violence, or of an offense involving sexual assault or abuse, indecent assault, stalking, or trafficking for which a protective order may be granted under applicable Code of Criminal Procedure provisions, who is representing himself or herself in a civil action.

The bill prohibits an attorney representing a party in a civil action from accessing the following:

·       an application for a protective order filed in Texas unless the protective order was granted and is in effect, has expired, or was vacated by final judgment; or

·       confidential or sealed portions of an application for a protective order or a protective order, including an address or the contact information of a protected party.

C.S.H.B. 1571 requires the registry to be configured to provide access to information in the registry to the following parties:

·       a court with jurisdiction over a case in which a person who is subject to a protective order appears related to a civil violation of the protective order or for any criminal offense;

·       the attorney general or a district attorney, criminal district attorney, county attorney, or municipal attorney who is prosecuting a person who is subject to the protective order;

·       an attorney representing a party in a civil action;

·       a victim of family violence, or of an offense involving sexual assault or abuse, indecent assault, stalking, or trafficking for which a protective order may be granted under applicable Code of Criminal Procedure provisions, who is representing himself or herself in a civil action; or

·       a peace officer who is investigating a person who is subject to the protective order.

C.S.H.B. 1571 also requires the registry to be configured to provide notice of the following information to a court that issued a protective order, if the person subject to the order appears in a court of another county for a civil violation of the protective order or any criminal offense:

·       the time, place, and nature of the person's violation or offense;

·       the name and location of the court with jurisdiction over the violation or offense;

·       the name and contact information of the attorney general or the district attorney, criminal district attorney, county attorney, or municipal attorney who is prosecuting the violation or offense; and

·       the name and contact information of any peace officer whose information is included in the registry as the investigator for the violation or offense.

C.S.H.B. 1571 amends the Family Code to require the answer in a suit for dissolution of a marriage to state whether, in regard to a party to the suit or a child of a party to the suit, the following applies:

·       there is in effect any of the following:

o   a protective order relating to family violence;

o   a protective order for victims of sexual assault or abuse, indecent assault, stalking, or trafficking; or

o   a magistrate's order for emergency protection; or

·       an application for any such order is pending.

The bill broadens the applicability of the requirement for the petitioner to attach to the petition a copy of each previously specified order in which a party to the suit or the child of a party to the suit was the applicant or victim of the conduct alleged in the application or order and the other party was the respondent or defendant of an action regarding the conduct alleged in the application or order without regard to the date of the order as follows:

·       includes in the entities subject to the requirement a respondent, who is required to attach the information to the answer; and

·       includes in the information to be attached to the filing a certification the petitioner or respondent reviewed the protective order and disclosed each order previously specified.

The bill authorizes a court to impose a sanction against a party who knowingly misleads the court regarding such an order or an application for such an order or who fails to disclose any of those applicable orders that are included on the protective order registry.

C.S.H.B. 1571 requires OCA to conduct a study to determine the following:

·       whether the changes in law made by the bill relating to the protective order registry can be securely implemented without risking system integrity or unauthorized access; and

·       the feasibility of expanding the protective order registry to support information sharing between national or other state databases.

The bill requires the office to prepare a report on the results of the study, including any recommendations for legislative action to increase the efficacy of the protective order registry or the safety of applicants for protective orders in Texas, and to submit the report to the governor, lieutenant governor, speaker of the house of representatives, and appropriate standing committees of the legislature not later than September 1, 2026. These bill provisions expire January 1, 2027.

EFFECTIVE DATE

September 1, 2025.

COMPARISON OF INTRODUCED AND SUBSTITUTE

While C.S.H.B. 1571 may differ from the introduced in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following summarizes the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.

The substitute includes provisions absent from the introduced that do the following:

·       require the OCA to conduct, prepare a report on, and submit to certain entities a study to determine whether the changes in law made by the bill relating to the protective order registry can be securely implemented without risking system integrity or unauthorized access and the feasibility of expanding the protective order registry to support information sharing between national or other state databases;

·       prohibit an attorney representing a party in a civil action from accessing an application for a protective order filed in Texas unless the protective order was granted and is in effect, has expired, or was vacated by final judgment or confidential or sealed portions of an application for a protective order or a protective order, including an address or the contact information of a protected party; and

·       amend the Family Code to:

o   require the answer in a suit for dissolution of a marriage to provide certain information;

o   broaden the applicability of the requirement for the petitioner to attach to the petition a copy of each order specified by the bill;

o   require a certification be attached to a petition or answer; and

o   authorize a court to impose a sanction against a party who knowingly misleads the court regarding such an order or an application for such an order or who fails to disclose any orders specified by the bill that are included on the protective order registry.