Skip to Content

Texas Introduces The “Anti-Red Flag Act” To Defend 2A Rights

Texas is once again making headlines in the ongoing national debate over gun rights. Representative Briscoe Cain (R-Deer Park) has introduced House Bill 162, aptly named the “Anti-Red Flag Act,” which aims to shield Texans from extreme risk protective orders (ERPOs), commonly referred to as red flag laws. This legislation represents a significant step in Texas’ ongoing commitment to defending the Second Amendment.

What Are Red Flag Laws?

What Are Red Flag Laws
Image Credit: Survival World

Red flag laws enable law enforcement, with judicial approval, to confiscate firearms from individuals deemed a risk to themselves or others. While proponents argue these laws are a tool to prevent violence, critics highlight their potential to infringe upon due process and Second Amendment rights. As noted by Ty O’Banner in an article on Mr. Colion Noir’s website, these laws often rely on accusations that are unverified and lack immediate recourse for the accused.

A Bold Move by Texas

A Bold Move by Texas
Image Credit: Washington Gun Law

House Bill 162, as reported by Emily Medeiros in The Dallas Express, takes a strong stance against red flag laws. The bill would prohibit state and local entities from enforcing or adopting any measures related to ERPOs unless explicitly authorized by Texas law. Furthermore, any federal red flag laws that violate due process would be deemed unenforceable in Texas.

The bill also introduces severe penalties. As Medeiros explains, individuals attempting to serve or enforce a red flag order within Texas, unless issued under state law, could face state jail felony charges. This marks a decisive effort to ensure Texans’ gun rights are not infringed without due process.

A Direct Challenge to Federal Overreach

A Direct Challenge to Federal Overreach
Image Credit: Washington Gun Law

In a video by Washington Gun Law, attorney William Kirk highlights that HB 162 doesn’t just target state-level enforcement but also aims to nullify certain federal measures. The bill explicitly states that federal statutes or regulations enforcing red flag laws, which infringe upon constitutional rights, are “unenforceable” within Texas. Kirk notes that while this language strengthens the bill’s stance, it could open the door to federal challenges under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

A Defense of Constitutional Rights

A Defense of Constitutional Rights
Image Credit: Washington Gun Law

Rep. Cain has emphasized the bill’s role in safeguarding constitutional freedoms. As he told The Dallas Express, “HB 162 is about standing up for the constitutional rights of Texans, ensuring that citizens are not stripped of their rights without due process.” Cain’s rhetoric underscores a broader resistance to federal overreach and a commitment to preserving liberties guaranteed by the Second Amendment.

Chris McNutt, President of Texas Gun Rights, echoed Cain’s sentiments, stating that the legislation ensures Texans “never lose their gun rights without due process or a crime being committed.” These statements reflect a collective resolve among gun rights advocates to prioritize constitutional protections over federal mandates.

The Problem with Red Flag Laws

The Problem with Red Flag Laws
Image Credit: Washington Gun Law

O’Banner, writing for Mr. Colion Noir, delves into the issues inherent in red flag laws. He points out that these laws often allow firearm confiscations based on unverified claims without providing the accused an opportunity to defend themselves in court. This lack of due process, he argues, sets a dangerous precedent, leaving room for false accusations and misuse.

Kirk concurs, noting in his analysis that red flag laws are often implemented through temporary, ex parte orders, meaning judges hear only one side of the case. This procedural flaw, Kirk suggests, undermines the accused’s ability to confront their accuser and offer a defense, raising serious concerns about fairness and justice.

Is Texas Missing an Opportunity?

Is Texas Missing an Opportunity
Image Credit: Washington Gun Law

While HB 162 takes a hardline approach, Kirk argues that Texas could have used this moment to craft a model for red flag laws that respect due process. He envisions a system where firearms can be temporarily removed from genuinely dangerous individuals but only through a full hearing with sworn testimony, cross-examination, and robust legal safeguards. Such a mechanism could address safety concerns while preserving constitutional rights.

A Growing Divide in Gun Policy

A Growing Divide in Gun Policy
Image Credit: Washington Gun Law

HB 162 is a clear countermeasure to the rising number of states adopting red flag laws. According to O’Banner, 21 states and the District of Columbia have implemented ERPOs, with local governments often bypassing necessary due process protections. Texas’ legislation signals a growing divide between states prioritizing gun control and those emphasizing Second Amendment rights.

Potential Challenges Ahead

Potential Challenges Ahead
Image Credit: Washington Gun Law

As Kirk warns, the bill’s broad rejection of federal red flag laws could invite legal challenges. Similar legislation in Missouri faced federal scrutiny and was ultimately invalidated due to conflicts with the Supremacy Clause. Texas lawmakers will need to navigate this legal minefield carefully to ensure the bill’s longevity.

A Strong Message from Texas

A Strong Message from Texas
Image Credit: Washington Gun Law

Despite potential hurdles, HB 162 sends a powerful message about Texas’ commitment to individual freedoms. As Medeiros highlights, the bill seeks to block federal overreach and reaffirm the state’s role in protecting constitutional rights. By refusing federal grants tied to red flag law enforcement, Texas further distances itself from policies it views as infringing on due process.

Public Support and Criticism

Public Support and Criticism
Image Credit: Washington Gun Law

The bill has garnered strong support from gun rights advocates, including McNutt and Cain, who view it as a necessary defense against unconstitutional measures. However, critics argue that red flag laws are a vital tool for preventing gun violence and that HB 162 may hinder efforts to address public safety concerns.

The Future of 2A Policy

The Future of 2A Policy
Image Credit: Survival World

HB 162 is more than just state legislation; it reflects a larger philosophical battle over the balance between individual rights and public safety. Texas’ move to prioritize due process and gun rights sets a precedent that other states may follow or challenge, shaping the future of Second Amendment policy in America.

A Stand for Freedom

A Stand for Freedom
Image Credit: Survival World

The “Anti-Red Flag Act” represents Texas’ unwavering dedication to protecting its citizens’ constitutional rights. While debates over red flag laws continue nationwide, HB 162 serves as a bold declaration of the Lone Star State’s priorities. As the bill progresses, it will undoubtedly spark further discussions about the intersection of gun rights, due process, and public safety. Texas has once again positioned itself as a staunch defender of the Second Amendment, ensuring its residents’ freedoms remain intact.