Texas Bail Backlash: Advocates Say New Amendment Treats the Accused as Guilty

The Texas Civil Rights Project (TCRP) is urging the Texas House of Representatives to reject Senate Joint Resolution 87 (SJR 87), a proposed constitutional amendment that would mandate the denial of bail for individuals accused of certain felony offenses if they have prior convictions or were on bail at the time of the alleged offense. On May 26, the House advanced SJR 87 on its second reading with a floor vote of 93-32.

In a press release issued on May 23, TCRP criticized the resolution, warning that it removes judicial discretion and erodes the constitutional right to individualized bail assessments. Under SJR 87, individuals could be denied pretrial freedom based solely on past convictions and a probable cause standard, rather than requiring the state to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the person poses a danger or flight risk.

This push for tighter bail restrictions comes amid a broader wave of bail reform legislation advanced by the Texas House this week. On Tuesday, lawmakers passed Senate Bill 9 and Senate Bill 40, both aimed at curbing pretrial release and limiting public funding for bail. While these bills passed with bipartisan support, a more controversial measure, Senate Joint Resolution 1 (SJR 1), failed to gain final passage after concerns were raised about its impact on immigrants with protected or pending legal status. Civil rights advocates, including TCRP, argue that these measures represent a growing trend of bypassing due process in favor of sweeping detention powers.

Chris Harris, Associate Director of Advocacy at TCRP, emphasized the threat SJR 87 poses to due process and the presumption of innocence: “The U.S. Supreme Court has made clear that pretrial detention must be a narrowly applied exception, not the rule. SJR 87 strips judicial discretion, ignores the particular circumstances of each case, and threatens the constitutional rights of Texans by presuming guilt before a fair trial.”

TCRP also noted the amendment’s sweeping application, pointing out that it lacks any timeline restrictions. Convictions from decades ago, even those incurred as minors, could result in automatic denial of bail, regardless of rehabilitation or personal growth since the original offense.

The organization also criticized SJR 87 for undermining the bipartisan compromise achieved with SJR 5 earlier in the legislative session. Unlike SJR 5, which requires a clear and convincing standard and guarantees access to legal representation at applicable hearings, SJR 87 relies on the lower probable cause threshold and does not ensure attorney access.“Justice demands that judges retain the ability to weigh all factors in bail decisions,” Harris stated. “This amendment layers new punishment on people that’ve long ago completed their sentences, even as minors, and denies them and others the due process that our constitution currently demands, threatening to exacerbate mass incarceration.”

*This is a developing story that will be updated