Estimated Time to Read: 7 minutes
As military deployments continue to be driven by executive orders and broad Authorizations for Use of Military Force (AUMFs), Texas has introduced House Bill 930 (HB 930) to reclaim a key constitutional safeguard. Authored by State Rep. Briscoe Cain (R-Deer Park), this legislation would prohibit the deployment of the Texas National Guard into active combat duty unless Congress has formally declared war or has taken other official action under the War Powers Clause of the U.S. Constitution. This bill is part of a broader nationwide movement to limit the federal government’s ability to send state National Guard units into overseas conflicts without explicit congressional authorization.
With over 29,000 Texas National Guard members deployed in the Global War on Terror since 9/11, and more than 23,000 serving in combat zones, HB 930 represents a direct challenge to the status quo. It raises a critical question: should Texas allow its National Guard to be deployed indefinitely under vague military authorizations, or should it demand that Congress fulfill its constitutional duty to formally declare war?
How House Bill 930 Would Work
HB 930 amends Chapter 437 of the Texas Government Code by adding a provision that strictly limits the activation of the Texas National Guard for foreign combat operations. Under this bill, the Guard could only be sent into active combat if Congress has formally declared war under Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the U.S. Constitution or has taken action under Clause 15, which governs calling forth the militia. The bill defines “active combat duty” as direct involvement in an armed conflict, participation in hazardous duties related to such a conflict, or performing any service that utilizes an instrumentality of war.
If enacted, HB 930 would prevent the federal government from deploying Texas Guardsmen under loosely interpreted military authorizations, such as the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs, which have been used to justify military action in Iraq, Afghanistan, and beyond. It ensures that Texas troops are only sent into combat through a constitutional process, reaffirming both state sovereignty and the legislative war-making powers intended by the Founders.
Why HB 930 is Necessary
One of the driving forces behind HB 930 is the increasing concern that modern military deployments have strayed far from constitutional intent. The U.S. Constitution grants Congress—not the President—the exclusive authority to declare war, yet this power has been largely circumvented through a series of AUMFs that have given broad discretion to the executive branch. Over time, these military authorizations have been used to justify wars and foreign interventions that never received direct congressional approval.
This erosion of constitutional war powers has had profound consequences for the National Guard. Unlike active-duty military personnel, National Guard troops are primarily under the authority of their respective state governments, with the understanding that they can be federally activated in times of war or emergency. However, due to legislative changes such as the Militia Act of 1903 and the National Defense Act of 1916, the federal government gained increasing control over state militias, ultimately integrating them into the broader structure of the U.S. military. While these changes were initially meant to strengthen national defense, they have led to a situation where state National Guard units are routinely deployed in conflicts without a congressional declaration of war.
The problem is particularly pronounced in Texas. Since the post-9/11 wars began, a staggering 75 percent of National Guard members nationwide have been deployed at least once, with many serving multiple tours. The prolonged and repeated deployments have not only placed significant stress on Guardsmen and their families but have also raised concerns about whether state forces should be subjected to federal wartime decisions without the proper constitutional framework in place.
A Growing National Movement to Defend the Guard
HB 930 is part of a larger “Defend the Guard” initiative that has gained traction across multiple states. More than two dozen states have introduced similar bills in an effort to curb federal overreach and demand a return to constitutionally grounded war powers. These efforts have been driven by bipartisan concerns over executive war-making authority, the cost of endless wars, and the proper role of state military forces.
In Texas, public support for this issue is evident. In 2024, nearly 84% of Republican Primary voters in Texas supported Proposition 6, a ballot measure stating that the Texas Legislature should prohibit the deployment of the state’s National Guard unless Congress has formally declared war.
Across the country, states are realizing that reclaiming authority over their National Guard units is not just a constitutional issue but a fundamental question of state sovereignty. The unchecked use of federalized National Guard troops in foreign conflicts has led many lawmakers to argue that states must reassert their power to decide when and how their forces are deployed. By passing HB 930, Texas would send a strong message that it will no longer allow its National Guard to be used as a backdoor mechanism for war without a formal declaration from Congress.
What’s Next for HB 930?
HB 930 received a public hearing on March 17 in the House Committee on Defense & Veterans’ Affairs, where lawmakers discussed the bill’s merits and heard testimony from military experts, veterans, and constitutional scholars. If the bill advances through the committee, it will move to the Texas House floor for a full vote.
Should the legislation pass, it would take effect on September 1, 2025, signaling a major shift in Texas’ approach to military deployments. While opponents may argue that the bill challenges federal authority over the National Guard, supporters contend that it is a necessary corrective to decades of unconstitutional war-making and an essential step toward restoring proper legislative oversight.
As HB 930 moves through the legislative process, all eyes will be on Texas to see whether it will lead the charge in reasserting constitutional governance over its National Guard or continue to allow state forces to be deployed under federal mandates that bypass congressional approval.
Final Thoughts: Will Texas Resassert Its Sovereignty?
The passage of HB 930 would mark a significant victory for constitutional war powers, state sovereignty, and the protection of Texas National Guard troops. It directly confronts the federal government’s reliance on AUMFs to justify perpetual military engagements and demands that Congress either fulfill its duty to formally declare war or refrain from sending state troops into combat.
For decades, the executive branch has bypassed Congress when engaging in foreign conflicts, often relying on vague military authorizations instead of clear, constitutionally mandated war declarations. The Defend the Guard movement aims to restore that balance, ensuring that state troops are not used as a tool for endless wars unless Congress explicitly approves their deployment.
With public support growing and multiple states considering similar measures, Texas has a critical opportunity to set a precedent for the nation. HB 930 is more than just a piece of legislation—it is a statement that Texas will stand for constitutional governance, state authority, and the well-being of its National Guard troops.
The question now is whether Texas lawmakers will take this historic step and reclaim their rightful role in determining when and how their state’s military forces are deployed.
Texas Policy Research relies on the support of generous donors across Texas.
If you found this information helpful, please consider supporting our efforts! Thank you!
