AUSTIN -- While it appeared that Texas Democrats successfully killed a controversial bill criticized for creating a new "vigilante" unit on the border, Republicans successfully added the unit on to different legislation hours later.
The bill would have allowed regular citizens to apply to patrol the border to arrest or detain migrants in counties along the border under a new unit housed within the Texas Department of Public Safety. The proposal also shifted more power to Gov. Greg Abbott in overseeing U.S.-Mexico border operations.
Democrats used a procedural tactic called a point of order to send the proposal back to a House committee. Because of a looming House deadline, it will not reach Abbott's desk.
But the new unit was added on amendment to a different bill by Rep. Ryan Guillen, R-Rio Grande City, on a 90-51 vote. That bill tentatively passed the House on a 92-51 vote. It can be passed to the Senate later today, just before last Thursday's midnight deadline to send House bills to the Senate.
Democrats tried to kill the amendment with two points of order but were unsuccessful, showcasing how both parties used various tactical strategies to their respective advantages.
House Speaker Dade Phelan, R-Beaumont, deemed the proposal -- which was initially carried by GOP Rep. Matt Schaefer of Tyler -- as one of his priority bills this session. Schaefer said the bill was a "bold new" approach to border security.
Schaefer declined to comment. A spokeswoman for Phelan had no comment.
Rep. Rafael Anchía's, D-Dallas, successful point of order that derailed the bill was noting that the legislation contained more than one subject and its caption failed to give proper notice of that.
Republicans don't have time to move Schaefer's bill through the House again because of Thursday's deadline.
It's the third time over the last few weeks that Democrats have successfully delayed debate on controversial legislation. The two times a proposal that would ban certain medical treatments for transgender youth has been up for debate on the floor it has been sent back to committee.
Tuesday's eye-aching-long House session saw protesters show up to the Capitol to rally against the proposal. Critics viewed the bill as creating a "vigilante" unit because it could have commissioned peace officers and noncommissioned officers, those citizens hired on for the unit in counties along the border.
Schaefer disagreed with that characterization. The noncommissioned officers would have needed express authorization and training set by Abbott and the Public Safety Commission before they could arrest or detain migrants.
Democrats raised concerns that the proposal removed DPS Director Steven McCraw's authority on border operations and instead gave the authority to the chief of the newly created unit -- who would be hired and fired only by Abbott.
Debate on the bill did not start until after 9 p.m., about 12 hours after the lower-chamber had assembled for the day. Gone were those same protesters who rallied in the rotunda early in the afternoon. Gone were the hundreds of attendees in the gallery, leaving only a handful of lobbyists and empty seats.
"Texas must do everything we can to stop the cartels from pumping poison into our neighborhoods," Schaefer said, referring to fentanyl, the synthetic opiate that's led to thousands of overdose deaths, as he presented the bill.
He added that it was meant to relieve the strain on the Texas National Guard, whose troops have been deployed to the border region for the last two years as part of Operation Lone Star, Abbott's multibillion-dollar border security effort using Texas National Guard members and DPS officers.
But some Democrats viewed the proposal as an avenue to challenge a Supreme Court ruling that limits how much states can enforce federal immigration laws. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has said he wants to challenge the legal precedents set by the 2012 ruling in Arizona vs. U.S.
Rep. Gina Hinojosa, D-Austin, asked Schaefer multiple times if his bill's intention was to challenge that ruling. Schaefer did not give a yes or no answer when asked if that was the proposal's intention.
"I cannot speak to what General Paxton said," Schaefer said.
Are you trying to reverse Arizona vs. U.S.?, Hinojosa asked.
"Your question has been asked and it has been answered," Schaefer replied.
Shortly after, Rep. Victoria Neave Criado, D-Dallas, spoke on her concerns to the bill saying it would lead to more racial profiling of Latinos and heightened risk for violence.
"An individual from North Texas drove to El Paso because language like the words 'invasion," said Neave Criado, referring to the 2019 mass shooting in which a white man targeted Latinos. "People are painting our communities as invaders of this state when we have been here for generations."
--------
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.