Overall Vote Recommendation

Vote Yes; Amend

Principle Criteria

Free Enterprise

Property Rights

Personal Responsibility

Limited Government

Individual Liberty

Digest

SB 412 proposes amendments to Sections 43.24 and 43.25 of the Texas Penal Code, modifying legal defenses available in cases involving obscene materials or conduct harmful to children. The bill adds an affirmative defense for judicial and law enforcement officers who, at the time of the offense, were discharging their official duties. However, it removes an existing broader defense that applied to professionals involved in education, medicine, psychology, psychiatry, law enforcement, judicial, or legislative purposes when handling such material.

Additionally, the bill repeals Section 43.24(c), which previously provided an affirmative defense for certain professionals. This legislative change narrows the scope of lawful possession and distribution of material deemed harmful to minors, effectively restricting legal protections to law enforcement and judicial officers alone. The bill applies prospectively, meaning any offenses committed before its September 1, 2025, effective date will be adjudicated under the previous legal framework.

By limiting the affirmative defense to law enforcement and judicial officers, SB 412 raises concerns about potential unintended consequences for educators, medical professionals, researchers, and legal analysts who handle such material in a professional capacity. While the bill strengthens protections against obscenity offenses, it may inadvertently criminalize those who engage with sensitive materials for legitimate, non-exploitative reasons.

The original version of SB 412 sought to limit the affirmative defenses available for individuals accused of distributing or exhibiting obscene materials harmful to children. Under the original bill, only judicial, law enforcement, and legislative actors would have retained an affirmative defense. This meant that professionals in educational, medical, psychological, psychiatric, and other governmental roles would lose their legal protections, potentially criminalizing individuals in those professions who handle such materials in legitimate contexts.

The substituted version of SB 412 makes a further restriction by removing legislative actors from the list of those who retain an affirmative defense. Now, only law enforcement and judicial officers can claim an affirmative defense when handling obscene or harmful material in their official capacity. The revised bill also explicitly repeals Section 43.24(c) of the Penal Code, which had previously outlined the broader list of justifications. Additionally, the substitute version no longer provides a generalized defense for legitimate purposes (e.g., educational, medical, or legislative use), instead limiting it to cases where law enforcement or judicial officers are directly engaged in their duties.

This change further narrows legal protections and could have more significant unintended consequences for educators, medical professionals, researchers, and policymakers who deal with sensitive content for legitimate and lawful reasons. While both versions of the bill aim to tighten protections against the distribution of harmful material to children, the substitute version makes the most aggressive restrictions yet by removing legislative actors and eliminating any defense for other professionals.

Author

Mayes Middleton

Co-Author

Peter Flores

Brent Hagenbuch

Bob Hall

Tan Parker

Contact the Author

Sen. Mayes Middleton

Capitol Phone:

(512) 463-0111

Capitol Office:

EXT E1.706

E-Mail:

[email protected]

Visit Official Website

Fiscal Notes

According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB) fiscal note, SB 412 is not expected to have a significant fiscal impact on the state. The bill narrows affirmative defenses for offenses related to the sale, distribution, or display of harmful material to minors by limiting them to only law enforcement and judicial officers acting in their official capacity. It also removes existing statutory protections for professionals engaged in education, medicine, psychology, psychiatry, or legislative work when handling such materials.

While the bill might lead to an increase in prosecutions, the LBB assumes that any additional costs related to enforcement, prosecution, supervision, or incarceration will not be significant. This suggests that the number of new criminal cases is not expected to increase dramatically or place a substantial burden on state correctional resources.

At the local level, no significant fiscal impact is anticipated for county and municipal governments responsible for enforcement. Any additional workload for local prosecutors, courts, or correctional facilities due to expanded criminal liability is expected to be manageable within existing resources. However, indirect economic effects—such as the potential impact on educational, medical, or research institutions—were not assessed in the fiscal note.

Vote Recommendation Notes

SB 412 seeks to strengthen protections against the distribution of obscene or harmful material to minors by narrowing the scope of affirmative defenses available under Texas law. The bill responds to growing concerns over sexually explicit and age-inappropriate content in Texas public schools, ensuring that those who engage in the sale, distribution, or exhibition of such material are held accountable. By limiting the affirmative defense only to judicial and law enforcement officers, the bill closes potential loopholes that could otherwise be used to justify harmful exposure to minors.

However, while the bill’s intent is commendable, its broad removal of affirmative defenses may create unintended consequences for educators, medical professionals, psychologists, and legislative actors who engage with sensitive material in a legal/legitimate capacity. Without a carveout for bona fide educational, medical, and legislative purposes, professionals operating in good faith could be subject to prosecution for handling materials necessary for academic research, medical evaluations, or policy analysis. Additionally, removing legislative actors from the defense could limit the ability of policymakers to engage in discussions and reviews of obscenity-related regulations without legal risk.

For these reasons, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote YES on SB 412 but also consider amendments to restore limited protections for legitimate professional use while maintaining the bill’s goal of preventing harmful material from reaching minors. A narrower revision that clearly distinguishes bad actors from professionals acting in good faith would better align with First Amendment principles while ensuring greater protections for Texas children.

Related Legislation

View Bill Text and Status