Conflict over a certain bill in the Texas Senate revolves around whether Child Protective Services should operate in transparency or darkness. Arguing for more transparency is an attorney who represented a family that had their child illegally taken away by the agency.
The version of State Rep. Ina Minjarezâ (DâSan Antonio) House Bill 135 that passed the Senate Health & Human Services Committee on May 13 requires CPS to inform parentsâorally and in writingâof their right to record by audio or video while being interviewed by the state agency. The Senate committeeâs version of the bill also makes it a Class C misdemeanor (maximum $500 fine, no jail time) to share those recordings online.
Supporters of the bill point out the section mandating parents be informed of their right to record, which is said to be a significant step towards holding the state agency accountable, as many parents arenât aware of that right. But critics have raised concerns about the fine for sharing those recordings on the internet.
âThat gag order provision doesnât fly with me,â Chris Branson, a lawyer for cases involving CPS, told Texas Scorecard.
âMost of [the bill] is good. It never hurts to require them to inform parents of their rights in a situation,â he observed. âThe one bad part about this ⌠is that predetermined statutory gag order would have kept the Pardos from getting as much help as they did.â
Branson was hired as the attorney for Daniel and Ashley Pardo, whose 4-year-old son, Drake, was illegally taken by CPS in 2019. The Texas Home School Coalition published the Pardos’ recording of the illegal seizure.
âThe Pardos never posted anything,â Branson said. âThe Texas Homeschool Coalition posted things in their efforts to fundraise for the case. Anything that detracts from their ability to fundraise on a big case means itâs less likely that people are going to be able to help.â
âThe nation helped fund this little boyâs return partly because we advised the Pardo family to record,â said Krista McIntire, a consultant on CPS issues, who opposes HB 135.
Minjarezâ office didnât respond before publication to Texas Scorecard’s inquiry about whether she supports the fine.
CPS later admitted they had no justification for taking Drake, and the Texas Supreme Court ordered that he be returned home. Last December, his parents were finally removed from Texasâ child abuse registry.
âCPS loves to work in the dark, as do some of their cronies,â Branson continued. âIt would be interesting to see whether somebody can bootstrap that statute in order to try to fine a nonparty group, like the THSC.â
Branson was asked what effect HB 135 would have if the recording fine remained in place.
âThe main effect is … thatâs another way to punish the parents,â he said. âBecause a parent who has her kids snatched out from under [her], they just grab their smartphone and film it and post it to their Facebook friends. [If that’s done and this fine is law,] they just violated state law without having a clue they did so, and those that do know about it live with the prescribed gag orders.â
State Sen. Bob Hall (RâEdgewood) was the only vote against sending the bill out of committee to the full Senate. It has yet to be voted on, but it is on the intent calendar to be considered.
âHad this bill been in effect at that time, the Pardo family might still be fighting to get their son home and facing criminal penalties,â Hall said. He also objected to HB 135 not requiring CPS to inform parents that agents could record them, as parents are âbeing questioned for something that could become a criminal investigation, and their recording could be used against them.â
Branson was asked why thereâs resistance to bringing more transparency to CPS cases.
âBecause a lot of what they do is dirty, and they donât like that being pointed out to the public,â he replied. âI may sound cynical, but Iâve been at this a lot of years, and I know of what I speak. They hate being recorded, or talked about, or anything in the public.â
In fact, I advise my clients to secretly tape-record any conversation theyâre in CPS with, because thereâs no quicker way to enrage a CPS agent than to let her know that sheâs being taped.
Branson was asked if this bill would have a chilling effect on him, the advice he gives his clients, and what they can do.
âIt would mitigate that somewhat,â he replied. âThe CPS worker has to know about the law, first of all, then actually have the mindset of thinking she needs to follow the law by letting the parent tape.â
âI’ve actually had CPS agents say, âWe don’t do that law stuff. We follow our manual.’ It’s in [their] manual … they just have to actually read it and follow it, which they rarely do,” said Branson.
He chuckled after being asked if he thought the fine would hold up in court. âThatâs one of those things where I would happily work on an attack of it pro bono, because that shouldnât stand,â he replied. âMy guess would be that it wouldnât. … That just seems like a prescription against your First Amendment rights to free speech.â
âI think a compromise could be reached,â he added. âIt goes back to the parents not even knowing that the law exists. Thatâs my main problem with it: Itâd be a new way to punish the parents.â
Some have argued in favor of the fine because of an alleged federal law regarding publishing images of children on the internet. Branson was asked about this. âIâm not aware of that statute, but there are some arguments to be made there that Iâve heard before that hold some merit,â he replied. âYou donât want to parade a childâs image, name, and personal information all over the internet.â
âSome sort of compromise could be sought, I suppose. But because nine out of 10 parents are not going to know that that exists, my gut reaction is to not have that statutory provision in there at all,â he said. âThe complete 100 percent gag order, thatâs unacceptable.â
Branson went on to ask, âWhy all this hiding? I prefer much more transparency than this hiding. If theyâre acting above the law and acting righteously, they shouldnât be too worried being talked about in the press.â
McIntire has issued a call to action for citizens to contact their state senator and ask them to oppose HB 135.