WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 234

Relating to extreme risk protective orders; creating criminal offenses.

89th Legislature (2025)

Texas HB 234 creates extreme risk protective orders allowing courts to temporarily restrict firearm access for individuals posing significant harm risks, with criminal penalties for violations.

Referred to Criminal Jurisprudence
#courts--general(i0160) #crimes--againstpersons--general(i0170) #criminalprocedure--general(i0208) #family--familyviolence(i0353) #lawenforcement(i0510) #mentalhealth&substanceabuse(i0019) #protectiveorders(s0495) #publicsafety #departmentof(v0251) #weapons(i0887)
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 234

Legislative bill overview

HB 234 establishes a legal framework for "extreme risk protective orders" (also called "red flag" laws) in Texas and creates criminal penalties for violations. The bill allows courts to temporarily restrict firearm access for individuals deemed to pose a significant risk of harm to themselves or others based on evidence presented by law enforcement, family members, or other petitioners.

Why is this important

Extreme risk protective orders represent a significant shift in Texas gun policy, as the state has historically had minimal firearm restrictions. This bill would create a new mechanism for temporary gun removal during crisis situations, potentially affecting thousands of Texans annually while raising questions about due process, mental health intervention, and Second Amendment rights in the state.

Potential points of contention

  • Due process concerns: Questions about whether the standard of evidence and hearing procedures adequately protect individuals' constitutional rights before firearm removal
  • Definition of "extreme risk": Debate over what behavioral or mental health indicators justify court intervention and whether criteria are objective or subject to interpretation
  • Implementation costs and training: Uncertainty about how law enforcement, courts, and mental health systems will coordinate and whether adequate resources exist for proper administration
  • Second Amendment debate: Fundamental disagreement between those viewing this as reasonable public safety measure versus those seeing it as unconstitutional firearm confiscation

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

Sign in to ask a question.