Texas House Bill HB3547

Texas 2019 - 86th Regular

Caption

Relating to civil actions involving the exercise of certain constitutional rights.

Impact

The impact of HB 3547 is significant as it emphasizes the protection of constitutional rights within the judicial system. By specifying the definitions around the rights of association and free speech, the bill aims to deter frivolous lawsuits that could hinder individuals or groups from engaging in collective activities for common interests. The proposed changes to the motion-to-dismiss process could alleviate the burden on defendants, allowing for a clearer path to challenge claims that may infringe on constitutional freedoms. However, the bill does not permit governmental entities acting in official capacities to file motions to dismiss, adding a layer of complexity for public officials involved in legal actions.

Summary

House Bill 3547 seeks to amend the Civil Practice and Remedies Code to better define and protect civil actions associated with the exercise of certain constitutional rights, particularly the rights of free speech and association. The bill introduces changes to the terminology and framework surrounding legal actions that relate to these rights, ensuring that individuals and groups can collectively express, promote, or defend their interests without fear of misappropriation claims or competitive breaches being used against them. Amendments to existing sections clarify what constitutes 'legal action' and detail procedures for dismissing cases that infringe on these rights.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding HB 3547 include the potential for misuse of the bill to shield individuals or organizations from legitimate claims under the guise of exercising constitutional rights. Critics argue that the amendments could lead to an environment where ‘free speech’ is improperly invoked to dismiss valid legal grievances. Supporters counter that the bill is essential to uphold constitutional protections against undue legal challenges, particularly in cases involving political speech or collective actions. This tension highlights broader issues surrounding the balance between protecting rights and ensuring accountability in civil actions.