Texas Lawmakers Debate Bail Reform Bills Amid Civil Rights Concerns

Last week, the Texas House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence conducted a hearing that included three significant bills: HJR 15, HJR 16, and HB 75. These bills, which align with SJR 1, SJR 5, and SB 9, have drawn attention for their potential impact on civil liberties, particularly concerning immigrant and Latino communities.

HJR 15 aims to expand pretrial detention by allowing judges to deny bail if they believe a defendant may miss a court date. This proposal has raised concerns about its impact on public safety and racial disparities.

During the hearing, Emma Stammen from the Bail Project commented, “HJR 15 is a proposal that would undermine public safety while stripping legally innocent Texans of their rights and freedom.”

Representative Joe Moody also expressed concerns about the lack of procedural safeguards in HJR 15, stating, “Last session, a version of this joint resolution included substantial changes that would have mitigated the harms of the legislation if passed. Some of those changes included a guaranteed access to counsel where bail denial is considered and a requirement that a judge imposes the least restrictive conditions when bail is set. HJR 15 brings us back to a version that is stripped of these procedural safeguards that would mitigate the harms that an expansion of pretrial detention would cause”.

Alongside concerns about pretrial detention, lawmakers also debated measures targeting undocumented individuals. Krystal Gomez, from the Texas Chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association criticized HJR 16, stating, “The definition of illegal alien in the resolution is deeply flawed and overbroad.” The proposed amendment seeks to deny bail to individuals suspected of being undocumented, a move that could lead to increased racial profiling. By amending the Texas Constitution, HJR 16 would prohibit bail for undocumented individuals charged with felony offenses.

Opponents argue that the measure undermines long-standing legal principles. Travis Fife, a staff attorney with the Texas Civil Rights Project, testified against the resolution, warning that it disrupts Texas’s historical commitment to the right to bail, which dates back to 1876. “In our view, this joint resolution knocks the scales off the table,” Fife stated. “It flips the historical tradition in Texas… and does so on shaky grounds that will disrespect the due process rights of folks going through our criminal system.”

Beyond changes to bail eligibility, lawmakers also examined restrictions on personal bonds through HB 75. The bill seeks to restrict the use of personal bonds, thereby increasing reliance on cash bail. It mandates cash bail more often, regardless of individualized circumstances. Critics suggest this bill might not improve public safety but could affect economically disadvantaged individuals.

Joy Davis from the Pure Justice Action Fund opposed HB 75, expressing concerns that the bill “will not only lead to mass incarceration. This will further the court backlog power, infringing on personal freedoms and leading to excessive government control and will cost taxpayers even more money”.

Stammen added: “Cash bail undermines freedom and fairness, creating a two-tiered system of justice that treats people differently depending on how much money they have”.

In a recent press release, Rochelle Garza, President of the Texas Civil Rights Project, expressed her perspective on the bills, saying, “These bills don’t make Texans safer—they turn discrimination into law and strip away fundamental rights, particularly from immigrant and Latino communities.” She added that the bills might lead to increased racial profiling and community division. 

Garza concluded, “This is not about public safety — it’s about criminalizing vulnerable communities. Our leaders must stand with Texas families and reject policies that will harm our future generations – or stay silent while our civil rights are stripped away.”

The hearing’s outcome may significantly influence Texas’s approach to bail and immigration policies, as stakeholders continue to discuss the balance between security and civil rights.