WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 707

Relating to the authority of the legislature to determine that certain federal directives are unconstitutional and to prohibit certain government officers and employees from enforcing or assisting in the enforcement of the directive.

89th Legislature (2025) Introduced by Brandon Creighton and 3 co-sponsors

Texas would empower its legislature to deem federal directives unconstitutional and ban state officials from enforcing those directives.

Referred to State Affairs
#federalrelations(s0862) #lieutenantgovernor(s0096) #legislature(i0520) #speakerofthehouse(s0306) #stateagencies #boards&commissions(i0749) #stateemployees(i0626)
4
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 707

Legislative bill overview

Bill SB 707 in Texas proposes that the state legislature has the authority to determine if certain federal directives are unconstitutional. If such a determination is made, the bill prohibits government officers and employees in Texas from enforcing or assisting in enforcing those federal directives. Essentially, this bill seeks to empower the state legislature to override federal mandates at the state level by deeming them unconstitutional and restricting their implementation within the state.

Why is this important

This bill touches on the crucial and often contentious issue of federalism and the balance of power between federal and state governments. It reflects a pushback against perceived federal overreach by empowering the state legislature to block enforcement of federal policies deemed unconstitutional. The implications are significant for state compliance with federal laws and directives, potentially affecting the uniformity of law enforcement and regulatory compliance across states.

Potential points of contention

  • The constitutionality of a state legislature unilaterally declaring federal directives unconstitutional, as this is typically within the federal judiciary's domain.
  • Potential conflicts and legal battles between state and federal authorities, possibly leading to costly litigation and uncertainty.
  • Risks to the rule of law and federal supremacy, which might undermine national policies on issues such as civil rights, environmental regulations, or immigration.
  • Ambiguities regarding which directives qualify for this treatment and how enforcement prohibitions would be practically implemented.
  • Impact on cooperation between different levels of government, possibly hampering effective governance and public service delivery.

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

Sign in to ask a question.