SB1220

Regular Session

Relating to the subject matter jurisdiction of the criminal trial courts of this state.

CriticalImmediate action required

Low Cost

Effective:2025-09-01

Enforcing Agencies

Criminal Trial Courts • District Attorneys • County Attorneys

Compliance Analysis

Key implementation requirements and action items for compliance with this legislation

Implementation Timeline

Effective Date: September 1, 2025
Compliance Deadline: Immediate. The legislation applies retroactively to any criminal action commenced before, on, or after the effective date. Pending regulatory matters are at immediate risk of conversion to criminal indictments.
Agency Rulemaking: None. This is a change to judicial jurisdiction; no regulatory agency will issue guidance or "soften" this requirement.

Immediate Action Plan

Audit Pending NOVs: Review all open regulatory enforcement actions immediately; assume local prosecutors are now reviewing these for potential indictment.
Secure D&O Coverage: Verify your insurance carrier will pay defense costs upfront for criminal charges related to regulatory matters.
Update Incident Response: Create a "Crisis Response" workflow that triggers criminal defense consultation the moment a significant regulatory violation is identified.
Review Industry Statutes: Commission a legal review of your specific industry codes to see if they contain explicit "exhaustion of remedies" language that might override SB 1220.

Operational Changes Required

Contracts

Indemnification Clauses: Amend Master Service Agreements (MSAs) with vendors and subcontractors. Standard clauses covering "fines and penalties" are insufficient. You must explicitly include "criminal defense costs and legal fees" arising from a vendor’s regulatory negligence.
Executive Agreements: C-Suite employment contracts should be reviewed to clarify the company's obligation to advance legal fees for criminal charges arising from regulatory duties.

Hiring/Training

Inspector Interaction Protocols: Retrain EHS and Compliance staff immediately. The standard practice of "full transparency to mitigate fines" is now dangerous. Staff must know when to invoke Fifth Amendment rights during administrative inspections, as admissions to an agency inspector are now immediately admissible evidence for prosecutors.
Unified Counsel Strategy: Establish a protocol requiring immediate coordination between administrative counsel and criminal defense counsel upon receipt of a Notice of Violation (NOV).

Reporting & Record-Keeping

Privilege Segregation: Restructure internal investigation protocols. Incident reports and compliance failure analyses must be generated under strict Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Doctrine. If maintained solely as "business records," they are subject to immediate seizure by prosecutors.
Evidentiary Standards: Maintain compliance logs (e.g., waste manifests, billing records) to criminal evidentiary standards, anticipating they may be scrutinized by a Grand Jury, not just an agency auditor.

Fees & Costs

Legal Defense Budget: No new statutory fees exist, but you must budget for "Parallel Proceeding" costs. You may need to retain separate administrative and criminal counsel simultaneously to avoid conflicts of interest.
Insurance Review: Review Directors & Officers (D&O) policies. Confirm coverage for the advancement of defense costs for criminal proceedings prior to final adjudication.

Strategic Ambiguities & Considerations

"Unless Expressly Provided Otherwise": The statute creates an exception if another law *expressly* requires exhaustion of remedies. It is currently unclear which specific regulatory codes (e.g., Texas Water Code vs. Occupations Code) meet this high statutory bar.
Prosecutorial Discretion: Without the administrative buffer, local District Attorneys may interpret complex technical regulations differently than state agencies. Anticipate inconsistent enforcement across county lines regarding what constitutes a "criminal" regulatory violation.

Need Help Understanding Implementation?

Our government affairs experts can walk you through this bill's specific impact on your operations.

Schedule Consultation

Information presented is for general knowledge only and is provided without warranty, express or implied. Consult qualified government affairs professionals and legal counsel before making compliance decisions.

Legislative Timeline

This bill's path through the Texas Legislature

TopicsCourts Courts--general Criminal Procedure Criminal Procedure--pretrial Procedure Ethics State Agencies, Boards & Commissions State Agencies, Boards & Commissions--admin. Procedure

Official Analysis

View HRO Analysis View All Bill Documents

BILL ANALYSIS

Senate Research Center	S.B. 1220
89R4339 JCG-D	By: Hughes
	State Affairs
	3/4/2025
	As Filed

AUTHOR'S / SPONSOR'S STATEMENT OF INTENT

The purpose of this bill is to overturn Ex Parte Charette, 2024 WL 4260409 (Tex. Crim. App. Sept. 18, 2024). In Charette, the court held that the Texas Ethics Commission (TEC) has exclusive jurisdiction under Chapter 571 of the Texas Government Code to investigate and determine violations of the Election Code before criminal prosecution can proceed. Based upon this announced legal principle, the court dismissed the criminal case against Charette because no TEC proceeding had occurred.

This bill adds Section 23.002 to the Government Code clarifying that subject matter jurisdiction in criminal trial courts is not conditioned on the exhaustion of civil remedies.

As proposed, S.B. 1220 amends current law relating to the subject matter jurisdiction of the criminal trial courts of this state.

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

This bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, institution, or agency.

SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS

SECTION 1. Amends Subchapter A, Chapter 23, Government Code, by adding Section 23.002, as follows:

Sec. 23.002. SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF CRIMINAL TRIAL COURTS NOT CONDITIONED ON EXHAUSTION OF CIVIL REMEDIES. Provides that the exhaustion of civil, including administrative, remedies, unless expressly provided otherwise, is not a prerequisite to the vesting in a trial court of subject matter jurisdiction over a criminal action for which the trial court would otherwise have jurisdiction under other law.

SECTION 2. Makes application of this Act prospective.

SECTION 3. Effective date: upon passage or September 1, 2025.

Senate Authors

Sen. Bryan HughesRepublican · Primary Author

Coauthors (1)

Brian Birdwell (R)

House Sponsor

Rep. John SmitheeRepublican · Primary Sponsor

Bill Text(with markup)

S.B. No. 1220

View bill text in multiple formats on Texas Legislature website

Fiscal NoteView Original

	AN ACT
	relating to the subject matter jurisdiction of the criminal trial
	courts of this state.
	BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
	SECTION 1. Subchapter A, Chapter 23, Government Code, is
	amended by adding Section 23.002 to read as follows:
	Sec. 23.002. SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF CRIMINAL TRIAL
	COURTS NOT CONDITIONED ON EXHAUSTION OF CIVIL REMEDIES. Unless
	expressly provided otherwise, the exhaustion of civil, including
	administrative, remedies is not a prerequisite to the vesting in a
	trial court of subject matter jurisdiction over a criminal action
	for which the trial court would otherwise have jurisdiction under
	other law.
	SECTION 2. This Act applies to a criminal action commenced
	before, on, or after the effective date of this Act.
	SECTION 3. This Act takes effect immediately if it receives
	a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, as
	provided by Section 39, Article III, Texas Constitution. If this
	Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, this
	Act takes effect September 1, 2025.

LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas

FISCAL NOTE, 89TH LEGISLATIVE REGULAR SESSION


March 5, 2025

TO:	Honorable Bryan Hughes, Chair, Senate Committee on State Affairs

FROM:	Jerry McGinty, Director, Legislative Budget Board

IN RE:	SB1220 by Hughes (Relating to the subject matter jurisdiction of the criminal trial courts of this state.), As Introduced

No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.

It is assumed that any costs associated with the bill could be absorbed using existing resources.

Local Government Impact

No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated.

Source Agencies:

212 Office of Court Administration, Texas Judicial Council

LBB Staff:

JMc, WP, DA, JPa

Related Legislation

Explore more bills from this author and on related topics

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about SB1220

What does Texas SB1220 do?

SB 1220 eliminates the "exhaustion of administrative remedies" defense in criminal cases, allowing prosecutors to indict and prosecute regulatory violations immediately without waiting for agency (e. g. , TCEQ, TSSB) proceedings to conclude.

Who authored SB1220?

SB1220 was authored by Texas Senator Bryan Hughes during the Regular Session.

When was SB1220 signed into law?

SB1220 was signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott on June 20, 2025.

Which agencies enforce SB1220?

SB1220 is enforced by Criminal Trial Courts, District Attorneys and County Attorneys.

How urgent is compliance with SB1220?

The compliance urgency for SB1220 is rated as "critical". Businesses and organizations should review the requirements and timeline to ensure timely compliance.

What is the cost impact of SB1220?

The cost impact of SB1220 is estimated as "low". This may vary based on industry and implementation requirements.

What topics does SB1220 address?

SB1220 addresses topics including courts, courts--general, criminal procedure, criminal procedure--pretrial procedure and ethics.

Legislative data provided by LegiScanLast updated: November 25, 2025

Need Strategic Guidance on This Bill?

Need help with Government Relations, Lobbying, or compliance? JD Key Consulting has the expertise you're looking for.