According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), SB 835 is not expected to have a significant fiscal impact on the State of Texas. The Office of Court Administration and the Texas Judicial Council anticipate that any additional costs resulting from the implementation of the bill, such as those potentially related to declaratory judgment proceedings for previously executed agreements, can be absorbed within existing agency resources.

Similarly, the bill is projected to have no significant fiscal implications for local units of government. This assessment suggests that while SB 835 may increase judicial activity modestly by introducing a path for declaratory relief, the volume and complexity of such cases are not anticipated to burden court systems or necessitate new appropriations.

In summary, SB 835 advances important policy objectives without creating new financial obligations for state or local governments. Its design avoids the need for new administrative structures or enforcement mechanisms, contributing to its minimal fiscal footprint.

SB 835, Trey’s Law, addresses a crucial gap in Texas civil law by prohibiting the enforcement of nondisclosure or confidentiality provisions in agreements that silence victims of sexual abuse, especially children. The bill stems from the real-life tragedy of Trey Carlock, a child sexual abuse survivor who was compelled into silence by a legal settlement agreement. His case highlights the harmful psychological toll that such gag orders can have on victims. By declaring these specific provisions void as a matter of public policy, the bill seeks to empower survivors to speak out about abuse without fear of legal repercussions.

Importantly, the legislation maintains a narrow and focused approach. It does not prohibit all confidentiality in settlements—parties can still agree to keep other aspects, such as financial terms, private. It also includes safeguards for agreements signed before the law takes effect, allowing enforcement only through a declaratory judgment process. This ensures legal clarity while preventing retrospective harm to survivors. The fiscal note accompanying the bill reinforces that it imposes no significant cost on state or local governments, suggesting that it offers a meaningful reform without imposing new burdens on public resources.

The bill aligns with core liberty principles: it enhances individual liberty by preserving the right to speak; reinforces personal responsibility by discouraging institutional cover-ups; and respects limited government by avoiding new bureaucracy. It also earns broad philosophical support across party lines, from free speech advocates to those seeking justice for victims of abuse. In light of its targeted scope, policy rationale, and minimal fiscal impact, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote YES on SB 835.

• Individual Liberty: The bill significantly strengthens the principle of individual liberty by affirming a survivor's right to free expression. The bill voids nondisclosure and confidentiality clauses that prohibit individuals from disclosing acts of sexual abuse. This protects the autonomy and voice of survivors, ensuring they are not legally coerced into silence as a condition of settlement or employment. The right to speak about personal experiences—particularly traumatic ones involving abuse—is fundamental to personal freedom and essential to healing, accountability, and justice.
• Personal Responsibility: The bill reinforces personal and institutional responsibility by prohibiting the use of legal agreements to shield perpetrators or complicit organizations from scrutiny. It discourages the practice of using NDAs to avoid consequences for sexual misconduct, pushing individuals and entities to face public and legal accountability for their actions. This aligns with the principle that those responsible for harm should not be allowed to hide behind contractual provisions to escape justice or public awareness.
• Free Enterprise: While the bill limits one aspect of contractual freedom in private enterprise (i.e., confidentiality clauses regarding abuse), it does so in a targeted and justified way. It allows other parts of a contract, including financial terms, to remain confidential, preserving the overall freedom of contract in the business environment. Ethical enterprise thrives in transparency, and the bill supports a marketplace where justice is not subverted for the sake of secrecy.
• Private Property Rights: The bill does not interfere with ownership rights or property transfers. Though confidentiality agreements can be considered a form of intangible contractual "property," the bill limits enforceability only when it directly conflicts with public policy on abuse disclosure. This limited intervention is consistent with the Texas Constitution’s protections, which allow property rights to be curtailed only when doing so serves a compelling public interest.
• Limited Government: The bill strikes a careful balance between reform and restraint. It does not expand government regulation or create a new bureaucracy. Instead, it relies on existing judicial mechanisms—such as declaratory judgments—to handle edge cases, especially for preexisting agreements. This ensures that the government does not intrude unnecessarily into private contracts but intervenes narrowly where public policy and individual rights are at stake. This limited and principled approach respects constitutional boundaries.

• HB 1974 (Similar To)
• HB 748 (Similar To)