Relating to conflicts between a protective order and certain other orders and to the transfer of a protective order.
ModeratePlan for compliance
Low Cost
Effective:2025-09-01
Enforcing Agencies
Texas District Courts • Texas County Courts at Law (Family Courts)
01
Compliance Analysis
Key implementation requirements and action items for compliance with this legislation
Implementation Timeline
Effective Date: September 1, 2025
Compliance Deadline:September 1, 2025 (All orders issued and motions filed on/after this date must comply).
Agency Rulemaking: No central agency rulemaking is required; however, individual District and County Courts will likely issue local standing orders regarding the submission mechanism for "Safety Impact Statements" throughout late 2025.
Immediate Action Plan
1.Audit Templates: Immediately revise all Protective Order document shells to include the Section 85.026(b) mandatory disclosure text.
2.Update Docketing Logic: Program case management software to flag the strict deadline for contesting transfers (First Monday after 20 days post-service).
3.Draft Safety Affidavits: Create a standardized affidavit form for clients to articulate specific safety risks associated with transferring their case to a family court.
4.Review Active Caseload: Identify cases where a Protective Order and a Divorce/SAPCR are pending in different courts; prepare clients for likely consolidation actions after September 1.
Operational Changes Required
Contracts
Retainer Agreements: Family law and civil litigation retainers must be amended to reflect that protective order proceedings will likely be consolidated with divorce/SAPCR suits. Scope of representation clauses should account for the mandatory transfer hearings.
Settlement Agreements: Drafts must acknowledge that protective order terms legally supersede conflicting terms in concurrent family law orders.
Hiring/Training
Litigation Staff: Paralegals and associate attorneys require training on the new "Shall Transfer" standard. The burden of proof has shifted: you must now affirmatively prove a transfer is *unsafe* to stop it, rather than arguing it is inconvenient.
Docketing: Staff must be trained on the new statutory deadline for contesting transfers: The first Monday after the 20th day after service.
Reporting & Record-Keeping
Mandatory Template Update: All Protective Order templates (including Ex Parte) must be updated immediately to include the following statement in boldfaced, capitalized, or underlined type:
> "DURING THE TIME IN WHICH THIS ORDER IS VALID AND SUBJECT TO TRANSFER, THE ORDER PREVAILS OVER ANY OTHER ORDER RENDERED IN A SUIT FOR DISSOLUTION OF A MARRIAGE OR A SUIT AFFECTING THE PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP TO THE EXTENT OF ANY CONFLICT BETWEEN THE ORDERS."
New Filing: Create a standard "Safety Impact Affidavit" for client intake. This document is now required to oppose a venue transfer.
Fees & Costs
Litigation Costs: Anticipate increased billable hours related to "Safety Impact" hearings. Because transfers are now presumptive, opposing them requires a higher evidentiary threshold, increasing preparation costs.
Strategic Ambiguities & Considerations
"Negatively Impact Safety": The statute mandates transfer unless it "negatively impacts the safety" of the protected party. The law does not define the threshold for this impact. It is unclear if psychological stress constitutes a negative impact or if a credible physical threat is required. Until appellate courts clarify, counsel should document *all* forms of risk.
Pro Se Submission Mechanisms: The law requires courts to provide an "opportunity" for parties to submit safety statements but does not dictate the format. Expect inconsistent procedures across different counties until local rules stabilize.
Need Help Understanding Implementation?
Our government affairs experts can walk you through this bill's specific impact on your operations.
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.
The Family Code currently lacks a provision to resolve conflicts between final protective orders and orders issued in subsequent divorce or child custody cases involving the same parties. When handled by different courts, there is a significant risk of conflicting terms, creating legal uncertainty and limiting the ability of the judge in the divorce or custody case to modify the protective order as needed.
Current law allows the court handling a divorce or child custody case to request a protective order transfer, but it does not require the issuing court to grant the transfer. This results in inconsistent handling of related legal matters, which can complicate enforcement and undermine the stability of child custody arrangements.
S.B. 1559 would require the mandatory transfer of a protective order to the court overseeing a related divorce or suit affecting the parent-child relationship if the case is filed after the protective order is issued. This ensures that one court has the authority to align the protective order with its rulings in the custody or divorce case, eliminating conflicts and improving legal consistency. By consolidating authority within the court responsible for determining the child's best interests, S.B. 1559 would enable necessary modifications to protective orders to reflect changes resulting from ongoing legal proceedings.
As proposed, S.B. 1559 amends current law relating to the transfer of a protective order.
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 Sections 85.064(a) and (b), Family Code, as follows:
(a)� Requires, rather than authorizes, a court that renders a protective order, if the order was rendered before the filing of a suit for dissolution of marriage or suit affecting the parent-child relationship or while the suit is pending as provided by Section 85.062 (Application Filed While Suit for Dissolution of Marriage or Suit Affecting Parent-Child Relationship Pending), on the motion of a party or on the court's own motion, to transfer the protective order to the court having jurisdiction of the suit, rather than transfer the protective order to the court having jurisdiction of the suit if the court makes the finding prescribed by Subsection (c) (relating to authorizing a court to transfer a protective order under Section 85.064 (Transfer of Protective Order) if the court finds that the transfer meets certain requirements).
(b)� Requires, rather than authorizes, a court that renders a protective order, if the order that affects a party's right to possession of or access to a child is rendered after the date a final order was rendered in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship, on the motion of a party or on the court's own motion, to transfer the protective order to the court of continuing, exclusive jurisdiction, rather than transfer the protective order to the court of continuing, exclusive jurisdiction if the court makes the finding prescribed by Subsection (c).
SECTION 2. Repealer: Section 85.064(c) (relating to authorizing a court to transfer a protective order under Section 85.064 if the court finds that the transfer meets certain requirements), Family Code.
SECTION 3. Makes application of Section 85.064, Family Code, as amended by this Act, prospective.
SB1559 establishes statutory supremacy for protective orders over conflicting divorce or child custody orders and removes judicial discretion regarding venue transfers. Effective September 1, 2025, courts must transfer protective order proceedings to the court handling a divorce or custody suit unless a specific safety risk is proven, requiring legal teams to overhaul drafting templates and litigation checklists immediately. Implementation Timeline Effective Date: September 1, 2025 Compliance Deadline: September 1, 2025 (All orders issued and motions filed on/after this date must comply).
Q
Who authored SB1559?
SB1559 was authored by Texas Senator Judith Zaffirini during the Regular Session.
Q
When was SB1559 signed into law?
SB1559 was signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott on June 20, 2025.
Q
Which agencies enforce SB1559?
SB1559 is enforced by Texas District Courts and Texas County Courts at Law (Family Courts).
Q
How urgent is compliance with SB1559?
The compliance urgency for SB1559 is rated as "moderate". Businesses and organizations should review the requirements and timeline to ensure timely compliance.
Q
What is the cost impact of SB1559?
The cost impact of SB1559 is estimated as "low". This may vary based on industry and implementation requirements.
Q
What topics does SB1559 address?
SB1559 addresses topics including family, family--family violence, protective orders, courts and courts--general.
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.
