WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 2570

Relating to extreme risk protective orders and certain other protective orders prohibiting possession of a firearm; creating criminal offenses.

89th Legislature (2025) Introduced by John Bryant

Texas bill creating extreme risk protective orders enabling courts to temporarily remove firearms from individuals judged dangerous, establishing criminal penalties for violations.

Referred to Criminal Jurisprudence
#courts--general(i0160) #courts--personnel(i0155) #family--familyviolence(i0353) #lawenforcement(i0510) #mentalhealth&substanceabuse(i0019) #military&veterans(i0535) #protectiveorders(s0495) #publicsafety #departmentof(v0251) #protectionofpersonalinformation(i0003) #weapons(i0887)
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2570

Legislative bill overview

HB 2570 would establish "extreme risk protective order" (ERPO) procedures in Texas, allowing courts to temporarily remove firearms from individuals deemed to pose a significant risk of harm to themselves or others. The bill creates criminal offenses for violating these orders and potentially expands existing protective order mechanisms to include firearm restrictions.

Why is this important

ERPOs, sometimes called "red flag" laws, represent a significant shift in firearm policy by enabling preventive intervention before harm occurs. Texas currently lacks such a mechanism, making this bill potentially consequential for public safety approaches and gun rights policy in the state.

Potential points of contention

  • Constitutional concerns: Second Amendment advocates argue ERPOs constitute firearm confiscation without due process, while proponents contend proper judicial review provides sufficient protection
  • Due process standards: Disagreement over what evidence threshold should trigger removal (risk assessment subjectivity vs. imminent danger requirements)
  • Implementation scope: Questions about which individuals can petition for orders (law enforcement, medical professionals, family members, teachers) and whether initial orders require notice/hearing or are ex parte
  • Defining "extreme risk": Lack of uniform definition creates concerns about inconsistent application and potential for weaponization against vulnerable populations
  • Burden on courts: Texas courts' capacity to handle potentially numerous petitions and hearings

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.