The bill grants immunity to officers who use weapons such as stun guns or tear gas on civilians as long as they claim to “reasonably believe” it was necessary.
AUSTIN, Texas — Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed a controversial bill into law Tuesday night, expanding immunity for peace officers who use less lethal weapons on civilians.
Senate Bill 2570, filed this past legislative session by state Sen. Pete Flores (R-Pleasanton), grants immunity to any police or correctional officer who uses weapons such as stun guns, rubber bullets or tear gas on a civilian, so long as they “reasonably believed” the actions were necessary.
Abbott filmed himself signing the bill in a video posted onto his X account Tuesday evening.
“Our law enforcement officers are on the frontlines to KEEP Texas a law and order state,” Abbott wrote in a post shared along with that video on X. “To have their back, I am signing a law to ensure they can use every tool available to combat criminals without being targeted by rogue prosecutors.”
The bill is not without its critics, however. Among the more vocal opponents of the new law is the Texas Civil Rights Project (TCRP).
“It’s an incredibly dangerous bill that’s very likely going to embolden bad actors that work as peace officers and guards at correctional facilities to misuse and abuse these devices even more than they already do,” said TCRP Associate Director of Advocacy Chris Harris.
There have been a number of protests around Dallas recently — with more planned soon — and though the law won’t take effect until September, Harris called it one of the most imminent threats that protesters could face.
“Officers who use or deploy less lethal weapons against [protesters] will be all but shielded from any sort of criminal responsibility — even if they were to seriously hurt or kill someone — unless it’s found they substantially violated their training,” Harris said.
The practical effect of this bill, Harris said, is almost total immunity from criminal responsibility for the use of these weapons. That’s because, with this law in effect, Harris said officers can justify the use of force by simply saying it complied with their official duties, which could include crowd control at a protest even though there may not be any immediate necessity to protect themselves or their fellow officers from harm.
“It opens up that these weapons will be used much more often for reasons that aren’t immediately clear, necessitating the use of force,” Harris said. “And then, even if harm or substantial harm or even death is caused, there will be no viable need to hold someone criminally responsible for misuse of these weapons.”
Just last month, a Dallas police officer was demoted after using “less lethal” ammunition at a protestor in 2020, causing him to lose an eye. The officer, Snr. Cpl. Ryan Mabry, pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor assault charge last November after initially being indicted on six charges of aggravated assault by a public servant and two charges of deadly conduct.