Posts Tagged ‘Brandon Waltens’

Dade Phelan Wants To Ban Memes

Tuesday, March 11th, 2025

After spending a great deal of special interest money to hang on to his Texas House seat and stepping down from the speakership after getting so many of his allies slaughtered in the primaries, Dade Phelan has decided on his next battle: outlawing memes.

Posting a political meme could soon land you in jail—if State Rep. Dade Phelan gets his way.

House Bill 366 would make it a crime to distribute altered media, including political memes, without a government-approved disclaimer. Violators could face up to a year in jail.

The State Affairs Committee will take up the bill by the former speaker of the House on Wednesday, alongside a slate of energy transmission legislation. It is the first hearing of the committee on legislation this session.

The bill specifically targets political advertising that features an “image, audio recording, or video recording of an officeholder’s or candidate’s appearance, speech, or conduct that did not occur in reality.” This broad language includes media altered using generative artificial intelligence technology. The Texas Ethics Commission would have the authority to determine the specific format, font, size, and color of the required disclaimer.

Critics say the legislation raises serious First Amendment concerns.

Ya think?

Fort Worth attorney Tony McDonald, who specializes in First Amendment litigation, blasted the measure, saying, “It’s amazing that this ridiculous bill is the top priority of the Texas House’s most powerful committee. This bill is obviously unconstitutional. It would criminalize protected speech on the basis of its content.”

Notably, the legislation could have sweeping implications beyond political advertising.

For example, the “Drunk Dade” parody call-ins on Michael Berry’s radio program would seemingly be criminalized under the proposed law, as they involve audio recordings that portray an officeholder’s speech in a way that “did not occur in reality.”

Additionally, the bill leaves questions about enforcement and selective prosecution.

Courts have routinely struck down laws that regulate political discourse based on content, citing the First Amendment’s strong protections for satire and parody.

Indeed. I’m guessing that this is precisely the sort of thing Phelan wants to outlaw:

The bill reeks of the sort of censorious rules against insulting a member of the ruling party you see in communist countries like China or Venezuela. Hell, even the traditionally prickly French repealed their law against insulting the dignity of the French president. The “published, distributed, or broadcast” clause alone is too broad to be constitutional. Even forwarding or reposting a meme is theoretically a crime.

It’s so poorly written and unenforceable bill that Babylon Bee piece “Media Scrambles To Fact-Check Image Of Trump Riding Hero Dog Into Massive Space Battle” could quickly result in actual government prosecutions, at least if Dade Phelan’s fragile ego has anything to say about it.

This is a stupid, unenforceable and unconstitutional bill that deserves to die a quiet death in committee.

Feel free to share your best Dade Phelan memes below.

Dade Phelan/Texas Speaker Race Update

Monday, September 16th, 2024

I’ve been needing to post a Dade Phelan/Texas Speaker’s Race update for a few weeks now, because I held off because I needed more information and I wasn’t sure what’s going on. Now a couple of tidbits of news have dropped that pretty much requires a post…but I’m still not sure what’s going on.

  • Now that Rep. John Smithee (R-Amarillo) has joined the race there are five Republican representatives who have declared they’re running for Speaker:
    • David Cook (Mansfield)
    • James Frank (Wichita Falls)
    • Tom Oliverson (Cypress)
    • Shelby Slawson (Stephenville)
    • John Smithee (Amarillo)
  • But wait! It’s not just republicans! Democrat Ana-Maria Ramos has also thrown her hat into the speaker’s race ring.

    State Rep. Ana-Maria Ramos has filed to run for Speaker of the House, becoming the first Democrat to do so in what is becoming a crowded race against incumbent Speaker Dade Phelan.

    Snip.

    With Republicans expected to maintain or even grow their current majority in the Texas House, Ramos is unlikely win her bid for speaker. It does, however, add to the ever-growing consensus that Phelan will not be speaker next session.

  • In theory, the Republican caucus will determine their speaker nominee by secret ballot.

    The vote for Speaker of the House will take place on the first day of the legislative session on January 14, 2025.

    The decision may be made long before that as part of the Republican Caucus’ nominating process.

    The process of Republican legislators nominating a unified speaker candidate ahead of the official vote at the start of the session in January was adopted in 2017, in an attempt to prevent Republican speaker candidates, like then-Speaker Joe Straus, from courting Democrat support for the position.

    In the years since, however, both the former Speaker Dennis Bonnen and the current Speaker Dade Phelan have released lists containing Democrat supporters ahead of the caucus vote, making the exercise a formality.

    This year appears to be shaping up differently as Phelan has already gained four challengers who have promised to appoint only Republicans as committee chairs and gain Republican support first. For the first time, the caucus nomination process could be significant.

    The caucus vote will take place in December as part of their retreat ahead of the session. To clench the caucus’ nomination, multiple rounds of voting can take place during a secret ballot. The winner must receive 2/3 support during the first two rounds of voting. If that does not occur, the threshold then drops to 3/5.

    The widespread disillusion with Phelan over the Paxton impeachment, the school choice vote, and so many Phelan loyalists getting slaughtered in the primary, plus the vocal opposition of Governor Greg Abbott, Lt. Governor Dan Patrick, and Senator Ted Cruz to Phelan continuing as speaker, plus a secret ballot, would seem to doom Phelan’s chances of being the Republican caucus choice.

  • But Texas speaker election rules run things on a top-two runoff basis, not round-by-round elimination, and the process is overseen by the Secretary of State. In combination with Ramos’s run, this would seem to eliminate Phelan’s chance to be elected speaker, as Democrats would presumably support Ramos on the first ballot, while Republicans would support whatever non-Phelan candidate gets the official GOP House Caucus nod, which means Phelan is left out of the top two.
  • Maybe Ramos is getting high on her own supply, actually believing that Democrats are ready to “turn Texas blue,” perhaps thanks to the Democratic Party’s relentless importation of illegal aliens. But since Ken Paxton has been hypervigilant in cracking down on potential voting fraud, that outcome seems…remote.
  • But since the cabal backing the Straus-Bonnen-Phelan speakership line is unlikely to go gently into that good night, I must be missing something. There must be some scheme to either keep Phelan in the speaker’s chair, or elect another cabal toady in his place, that I’m just not seeing.
  • Phelan shows every sign of trying to finagle another term, even going so far as to declare that now he he really is for school choice after working so hard to kill it last session. I don’t think anyone believes those new spots are genuine.
  • Another sign that Phelan is working to win is the announcement that former Republican Governor Rick Perry has hired as a senior advisor.

    Perry’s new position follows the announcement of Phelan’s new chief of staff, Mike Toomey, whose campaign finance records show numerous donations to Democrat lawmakers since 2015.

    Toomey, who previously served as chief of staff to Rick Perry, has been a casino lobbyist, which garnered him between $3.4 and $6.7 million this session alone. One of Toomey’s largest clients is the Las Vegas Sands Corporation, which seeks to legalize monopolistic casino gambling in Texas.

    Toomey has also represented Texans for Lawsuit Reform, the group that advocated for Phelan’s impeachment of Paxton last year. Notably, Perry’s name was on the by-line of a Wall Street Journal op-ed calling for Paxton’s impeachment and conviction; the article was ghost-written by TLR.

    As of 2022, Perry has warmed up to the expansion of gambling, becoming a spokesperson for Sports Betting Alliance, a group lobbying to legalize mobile sports gambling in Texas.

    Perry will advise Phelan in a “voluntary capacity” until the start of the 89th Texas Legislature in January, according to an official press release.

    Perry’s support of Phelan may seem inexplicable to Texas Republicans who remember him as a conservative stalwart, but Perry has long gone off on ill-advised tangents every now and them, from backing the Gardasil mandate for pre-teen girls to his love for expensive high speed rail subsidies to derailing his presidential campaign by debating while hopped up on goofballs for back surgery.

    Plus, I suspect that gambling money pipeline jets out a pretty lucrative stream…

  • Finally, I note for the record this Texas Scorecard “Speaker Phelan Used State Jet for Campaign Activities” article.

    A new investigative report revealed that House Speaker Dade Phelan used a state jet for campaign activities.

    KHOU 11 has reported that members of the Texas House have used TxDOT’s executive-style jets for activities that crossed the line between “official state business” into personal or political business.

    According to state law, the jets cannot be used for attending “an event at which money is raised for private or political purposes.”

    When Phelan (R-Beaumont) used the jet in September 2022 to attend a speaking engagement at the leftwing Texas Tribune Festival, he didn’t stop there. He then used the jet to attend a University of Texas versus Texas Tech football game in Lubbock.

    In a statement to KHOU 11, Phelan’s office said the trip was to meet with Tech officials and paid for by university donors.

    However, campaign finance records show that he accepted a $2,500 in-kind contribution for “food and beverage for campaign event” the day he got to Lubbock. He also had an $880 charge at a hotel for “staff lodging for political fundraiser.”

    KHOU 11 estimated that he raised at least $37,522 for his campaign on the trip.

    Yeah, probably a violation, but it seems pretty smallball stuff compared to Phelan’s other shenanigans…

  • Supreme Court: Yes, Texas Can Deport Illegal Aliens. 5th Circuit: Psych!

    Wednesday, March 20th, 2024

    Here I was all ready to with what I wanted to write about, only to have the judicial system throw me a curve. Yesterday, it looked like the Supreme Court was finally giving Texas the green light to deport illegal aliens.

    The Supreme Court on Tuesday lifted its freeze of a Texas immigration law which allows state and local law enforcement to arrest illegal immigrants and empowers state judges to deport them.

    The Court’s six conservative justices dismissed the Biden administration’s emergency appeal, allowing the law to remain in effect while the issue is adjudicated by lower courts. The majority did not explain its reasoning, as is typical, but Justice Amy Coney Barrett, joined by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, issued a concurring opinion explaining that Texas should be allowed to enforce its law until a lower court definitively strikes it down.

    “If a decision does not issue soon,” Barrett wrote, “the applicants may return to this court.”

    On X Tuesday, Texas Governor Abbott acknowledged that litigation over the law will continue in lower courts.

    “BREAKING: In a 6-3 decision SCOTUS allows Texas to begin enforcing SB4 that allows the arrest of illegal immigrants,” he wrote. “We still have to have hearings in the 5th circuit federal court of appeals. But this is clearly a positive development.”

    Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton celebrated the ruling on X.

    “HUGE WIN: Texas has defeated the Biden Administration’s and ACLU’s emergency motions at the Supreme Court,” he said. “Our immigration law, SB 4, is now in effect. As always, it’s my honor to defend Texas and its sovereignty, and to lead us to victory in court.”

    In court papers, Paxton said the Texas law does not undermine federal law but complements it regarding immigration enforcement, which the federal government is supposed to be fulfilling. The Biden administration for many months has been flouting federal immigration law by paroling illegal immigrants into the U.S. instead of detaining them.

    The Constitution “recognizes that Texas has the sovereign right to defend itself from violent transnational cartels that flood the state with fentanyl, weapons, and all manner of brutality,” Paxton said in filings, according to NBC News.

    Texas is “the nation’s first-line defense against transnational violence and has been forced to deal with the deadly consequences of the federal government’s inability or unwillingness to protect the border,” he added.

    Chalk one up for controlling the borders and the rule of law, right?

    Fifth circuit: Not so fast!

    A procedural victory for Texas allowing the state to enforce its new border security law while the Biden administration’s battle against the measure continues to work its way through the courts was short-lived.

    While the U.S. Supreme Court moved to allow the law to go into effect on Tuesday afternoon, hours later the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals put the law on hold yet again.

    Senate Bill 4, which was set to go into effect earlier this month, creates a state crime for entering the country illegally, paving the way for state law enforcement to arrest illegal aliens.

    After the federal government challenged the measure in a lawsuit, U.S. District Judge David Alan Ezra blocked the law from going into effect. It has since been sent to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

    In the meantime, a procedural fight had taken place over whether the state could enforce the law awaiting final judgment in the case.

    In a 6-3 decision on Tuesday, the Supreme Court denied the Biden administration’s request to halt enforcement of the law, allowing Texas to begin enforcement immediately.

    At the time, Attorney General Ken Paxton called the decision a “huge win” for Texas.

    “Texas has defeated the Biden Administration’s and ACLU’s emergency motions at the Supreme Court. Our immigration law, SB 4, is now in effect. As always, it’s my honor to defend Texas and its sovereignty, and to lead us to victory in court,” said Paxton.

    That victory was short-lived, as late Tuesday night the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals placed another stay on the law from being enforced.

    Frustrating, but it underscores the difficulty the Supreme Court faces, namely: How do you reign in an executive branch hellbent on ignoring clear laws on securing the border against illegal aliens that instead actual aids and abets illegal aliens breaking those same laws?

    What mechanisms can the Supreme Court use to reign in a rogue executive without causing a constitutional crisis?

    The Fifth Circuit had a hearing scheduled this morning on the issue but evidently haven’t issued a ruling. I’ll try to update this if it does…

    The Long Road To Texas Constitutional Carry

    Sunday, June 20th, 2021

    Though the 87th legislative regular session was a very mixed bag, among the good bills to actually make it to the end of the sausage factory was constitutional carry, and Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed that and a host of other Second Amendment bills this week:

    Gov. Greg Abbott signed a number of pro-Second Amendment bills that were approved by the state legislature earlier this year at a press conference at the Alamo on Thursday.

    “We gathered today at what truly is considered to be the cradle of liberty in the Lone Star State,” said Abbott.

    The governor said they were holding the press conference “where men and women put their lives on the line, and they lost their lives, for the ultimate cause of freedom.”

    “They fought for freedom. They fought for liberty, and that includes the freedom to be able to carry a weapon.”

    Legislation that the governor signed, which will all go into effect on September 1, includes:

    • Senate Bill (SB) 19: prohibits state agencies and political subdivisions from contracting with any business that discriminates against firearm businesses or organizations.
    • SB 20: requires hotels to allow guests to store their firearms in their rooms.
    • SB 550: removes the specific language in state code that handguns must be worn in a “shoulder or belt” holster, allowing individuals to utilize any type of holster.
    • House Bill (HB) 957: exempts Texas-made suppressors from federal regulations surrounding the noise-reducing accessories.
    • HB 1500: removes the governor’s ability in state code to regulate firearms during a disaster declaration.
    • HB 1927: the “constitutional carry” bill that allows nearly all Texans over the age of 21 who can legally possess a handgun to legally carry it in public without a special permit.
    • HB 2622: the “Second Amendment sanctuary” bill that prohibits state and local government entities from enforcing certain types of potential federal firearm regulations that are not included in state code.

    “[The Alamo defenders] knew the reason why somebody needed to carry a weapon was far more than just to use it to kill game that they would eat. They knew as much as anybody the necessity of being able to carry a weapon for the purpose of defending yourself against attacks by others,” said Abbott.

    The governor pointed to the ongoing border crisis as a reason for Texans needing to be armed to defend themselves “against cartels and gangs and other very dangerous people.”

    HB 1927, the Firearm Carry Act of 2021, takes effect September 1, so idiots blaming the Sixth Street shooting on it are talking out their ass.

    In an email, Gun Owners of America Texas Director Rachel Malone notes that it took a decade to reach this point:

    For me, the journey began ten years ago, in 2011. I became aware of the licensed open carry bill that the Texas Legislature was considering, and I figured that all the politically-involved people would do the work to pass it. How hard could that be? This is Texas, after all.

    I was shocked when I heard that the bill had died without even receiving a vote….

    When I showed up in 2013 for the legislative session, there were about half a dozen dedicated grassroots Texans who spoke up with me to end the permit requirement. That year, our words seemed to fall on deaf ears.

    However, when all the significant gun bills in 2013 died, many more Texans came to the same conclusion that I had in 2011: you shouldn’t take it for granted that someone else will do the work to protect your rights.

    During the next several legislative sessions, in 2015, 2017, and 2019, increasing numbers of Texans began showing up when it mattered — not merely at protests or rallies, but actually beginning to do the work inside the Capitol.

    It was a long, uphill battle that not only took a lot of work and effort, but one that was ignored or fought by state congressional leadership along the way:

    Constitutional carry has been a top priority for the Republican Party of Texas and gun owners across the Lone Star State for a long time.

    In fact, constitutional carry was the first “legislative priority” approved by the delegates to the Texas GOP’s convention a decade ago.

    Even as the list of party priorities expanded to eight over the years, constitutional carry has remained one of the party’s top goals for the legislature, as 20 other states—including Vermont—enjoy some form of permitless carry.

    Despite this fact, however, the bill had not received much traction in the Texas Legislature in recent sessions. In 2019, for example, the bill was sent by then-House Speaker Dennis Bonnen to a committee led by Democrat State Rep. Poncho Nevarez (Eagle Pass), where it was not even given a hearing. Bonnen himself even referred to supporters of the legislation as “fringe gun activists.”

    That same year, the legislation was not even filed in the Texas Senate.

    So entering the legislative session at the beginning of 2021, the fight to pass the bill looked like an uphill battle. As the session began, numerous bills were filed in the House to remove the permit requirement to carry handguns, while State Sen. Drew Springer (R–Muenster) filed similar legislation in the Senate.

    When committee assignments were announced in early February in the Texas House, new hope appeared for passing the bill.

    Instead of appointing a Democrat to chair the Homeland Security and Public Safety Committee that has traditionally blocked constitutional carry legislation in the past, House Speaker Dade Phelan appointed Republican State Rep. James White (Hillister).

    White, a known supporter of constitutional carry who had previously filed a bill to implement it in a previous session, was joined on the committee by four Republicans who had been endorsed by Gun Owners of America, an organization that has heavily advocated for constitutional carry, including State Reps. Cole Hefner (Mt. Pleasant), Matt Schaefer (Tyler), Jared Patterson (Frisco), and Tony Tinderholt (Arlington).

    Ultimately it was Schaefer’s House Bill 1927 that made its way out of the committee and onto the House floor.

    On Thursday, April 15, after several hours of debate and attempts by opponents to derail the legislation, the bill passed the House by a vote of 84 in support and 56 in opposition.

    While most Democrat efforts to amend the bill were rebuffed, so too were some efforts by Republicans to strengthen the bill. One amendment that would have lowered the age from 21 to 18, for example, was strongly rebuked.

    Notably, the lone Republican to vote against the bill was State Rep. Morgan Meyer (R–Dallas), while some Democrats like State Rep. Leo Pacheco (San Antonio) and Terry Canales (Edinburg) joined Republicans in support of the legislation

    With the bill having passed its first major hurdle, attention quickly turned to the other chamber.

    Just a few days after the bill’s passage in the House, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said the issue did not have enough votes to pass the Senate.

    Almost instantly, activists began to light up Senators’ phone lines, demanding to know which Republicans were secretly blocking the bill behind the scenes.

    Then, the Senate began to act.

    First State Sen. Charles Schwertner (R–Georgetown) filed a new bill on the subject that was almost immediately referred to the Senate Administration Committee, chaired by Schwertner himself.

    Then, seemingly overnight, Patrick created a new committee called the Senate Special Committee on Constitutional Issues. The only bill referred to the committee? HB 1927, the constitutional carry bill that passed the House the week prior.

    Patrick then promised a vote on the issue in the Senate, even if it didn’t have the votes to pass, a move that would be considered highly unusual in the chamber, where normally authors must show they have the votes to pass their bill before it is brought up for consideration.

    On May 5, the bill finally passed on an 18-31 party-line vote in the Senate. Due to amendments added in the Senate, the bill was sent to a conference committee, where members from House and Senate work to come to an agreement on which version of the bill will ultimately be sent to the governor.

    On May 24, with just a week left in the session, the bill received final approval by both chambers.

    Texas is actually fairly late to the game in passing Constitutional Carry:

    35 years ago, it was illegal in 16 states (including Texas) for a civilian to carry a concealed weapon. Only Vermont did not require a pistol permit.

    Working through the slow process of going state to state to change the law, the revolution happened.

    First came the switch from no permit to may permit. That placed the decision on issuing permits in the hands of elected sheriffs, which explains why California and New York have not budged. Democrat sheriffs pocket a lot of money from patrons who want to carry.

    Then came shall permit. This put the onus on law enforcement to show why a person should not carry a concealed weapon.

    Finally, came freedom. 19 states no longer require the state’s permission to carry a concealed weapon.

    What happens next? Well, as with open carry and campus carry, expect the gun grabbing crowd to predict horrific bloodshed from constitutional carry that never materializes, because it hasn’t happened in any other state that passed constitutional carry. Indeed, the three safest states in the union (Maine, Vermont and New Hampshire) are all Constitutional Carry states.

    It’s been a long, hard road to get to this point, but it shows that dedicated activists can overcome establishment opposition and inertia to pass pro-freedom laws. And every pro-freedom law passed makes it that much harder for the leviathan state to take away those rights in the future.

    There are no lost causes in American history because there are no won causes, and the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.