Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate approves constitutional amendment to deny bail for certain repeat violent offenders
Summary
The Senate passed SJR 87 to amend the Texas Constitution so judges must deny bail for specified violent felonies if the defendant has a prior conviction for certain felonies or was on bail at the time of the alleged new offense. Backers said the measure closes a gap for repeat violent offenders; opponents urged discretion and a higher evidentiary
The Texas Senate voted to place Senate Joint Resolution 87 before voters, a proposed constitutional amendment that would require denial of bail for persons accused of certain violent felony offenses when the person previously was convicted of similar felonies or was on bail at the time of the new alleged offense.
Senator Huffman, the Senate's floor sponsor, described the measure as a response to data from the Office of Court Administration showing high numbers of violent-offense defendants receiving low bail amounts. On the floor she said the amendment targets a narrow set of offenses and circumstances and would "give judges a tool" to hold repeat violent offenders pretrial when probable cause is established and a prior qualifying conviction or pending qualifying offense exists.
Floor amendments clarified ballot language and procedural protections. Senator Huffman offered a floor amendment replacing the phrase "instant offense" with "new offense" to improve voter clarity; Senator Alvarado offered an amendment reaffirming that the defendant is entitled to legal representation at the hearing and that the prosecutor must meet evidentiary standards. Both amendments were adopted on the floor.
Opponents urged caution. Senator Eckhart spoke against the resolution, saying that it removes judicial discretion and lacks a clear-and-convincing evidentiary standard found in an alternative proposal (SJR 5): "This bill, although well intentioned, does not give the judges discretion on a case by case basis. And it doesn't, have a higher standard of proof of clear and convincing." She said she planned to vote no in the hope the discretionary alternative would move forward.
After debate and adopted amendments, the Senate passed SJR 87 by recorded vote (29 ayes, 2 nays on the final vote recorded on the floor). The resolution will go on the ballot for voter approval if the House likewise advances the measure and procedural steps for a constitutional amendment are fulfilled.
Why it matters: If approved by voters the amendment would constrain bail in a narrowly defined set of repeat violent-offender cases, shifting pretrial decision-making away from judicial discretion in those enumerated circumstances. Supporters argued it protects public safety; opponents warned it may reduce individualized assessment.
