According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), the bill is not expected to have a significant fiscal impact on the state. The legislation would expand eligibility for protective orders to include victims of certain burglary offenses, potentially resulting in an increase in the number of protective order applications filed with the courts. However, according to the Office of Court Administration (OCA), this increase is not anticipated to be substantial enough to generate meaningful additional costs or necessitate new resources for the state court system​.

The fiscal note also addresses the implications for local governments. Similarly, no significant fiscal impact is expected at the county or municipal level. While local courts and prosecutors may experience a minor uptick in caseloads related to protective order filings and enforcement, the existing infrastructure is considered sufficient to absorb this change without the need for increased funding or staffing.

Overall, HB 2596 is designed to enhance victim protections without imposing new or burdensome fiscal obligations on the judicial system or local governments. The limited scope of eligible burglary cases and the targeted application of protective orders help ensure that any increase in administrative workload remains manageable within current budgetary and operational capacities.

HB 2596 represents a principled, targeted enhancement of protections for victims of serious criminal offenses—specifically, victims of first- and second-degree felony burglary of a habitation. The bill closes a notable gap in existing law by allowing these individuals to apply for protective orders, a remedy currently available to victims of sexual assault, trafficking, and stalking. This expansion ensures that victims of aggravated home invasions, who may face continued threats or trauma, have equal access to the judicial protections needed to restore their sense of safety and autonomy. By granting these individuals the ability to request a protective order regardless of their relationship to the offender, the legislation affirms a critical individual liberty: the right to be secure in one’s home and person.

One of the key strengths of HB 2596 is that it does not meaningfully grow the size or scope of government. The bill does not create any new government programs, bureaucracies, or criminal offenses. Instead, it builds upon an existing civil legal framework by extending eligibility criteria for protective orders. The courts, prosecutors, and law enforcement agencies involved in handling protective orders are already equipped to manage these matters, and the bill simply broadens the pool of eligible applicants. This is a refinement, not an expansion, of state power, and it remains tightly focused on supporting victims within a framework that already exists.

Moreover, the legislation imposes no new burdens on Texas taxpayers. The Fiscal Note prepared by the Legislative Budget Board confirms that no significant fiscal impact to the state or to local governments is anticipated. While there may be a modest increase in protective order filings, the Office of Court Administration has stated that current resources are sufficient to absorb the change without the need for new expenditures or staff. Thus, the bill maintains fiscal discipline and respects taxpayer resources, a core tenet of limited government.

Equally important, HB 2596 does not impose a regulatory burden on individuals, businesses, or communities. There are no new mandates, fines, compliance requirements, or rulemaking authorities established under this legislation. It functions entirely within the realm of civil judicial procedure, providing an optional legal tool for victims of specific crimes. Its effect is to enhance individual agency rather than expand state control.

In conclusion, HB 2596 embodies a balanced and responsible approach to policy. It strengthens protections for individuals harmed by serious criminal conduct without expanding government authority, spending, or regulatory intrusion. It aligns with the principles of individual liberty, personal responsibility, private property rights, and limited government. For these reasons, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote YES on HB 2596.

• Individual Liberty: The bill strengthens individual liberty by empowering victims of aggravated burglary to seek protective orders regardless of their relationship to the offender. This ensures that individuals have the legal tools necessary to protect their bodily autonomy and safety, particularly in situations where their home—a deeply personal and constitutionally protected space—has been violently invaded. Extending this right affirms the idea that every person has a fundamental right to security and peace of mind without undue delay or legal barriers.
• Personal Responsibility: The bill reinforces the principle of personal responsibility by holding offenders accountable through civil legal mechanisms. It ensures that individuals who commit first- or second-degree felony burglary of a habitation may be subject to a protective order, thereby imposing continuing legal obligations post-conviction. This affirms the societal expectation that criminal conduct carries ongoing consequences, especially when it jeopardizes the safety of others.
• Free Enterprise: The bill has no direct impact on free enterprise. It neither regulates businesses nor interferes with commerce. Its effects are confined to the criminal justice and civil legal systems, specifically concerning the protection of individual victims of serious crimes.
• Private Property Rights: The bill directly upholds private property rights by recognizing that serious intrusions into one’s home represent a violation not just of property, but of personal sovereignty. By allowing victims of home burglary to seek protective orders, the law reinforces the idea that a person’s home is their sanctuary—and that the law will respond swiftly to protect that space from further encroachment.
• Limited Government: The bill is a strong example of limited government in action. It leverages existing legal processes—protective orders under Chapter 7B of the Code of Criminal Procedure—without expanding bureaucracy or regulatory powers. It does not establish new criminal penalties or administrative structures. Instead, it applies existing legal protections to a new but logically consistent group of victims. It respects both individual autonomy and government restraint.