Texas Iryna’s Law aims to enhance public safety by restricting unsecured pretrial release for violent offenders, increasing judicial oversight, and mandating mental health evaluations for defendants with mental illness.
Full text
An Act Relating to Pretrial Release Conditions, Judicial Oversight, and Mental Health Evaluations in Criminal Proceedings; Enacting Provisions Modeled on Public Safety Reforms; to Be Known as Texas Iryna’s Law.
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Texas:
Section 1. Short Title
This Act may be cited as “Texas Iryna’s Law.”
Section 2. Findings and Purpose
The Legislature finds that dangerous individuals with prior criminal histories or mental health issues have been released pretrial on non-secured conditions, leading to further violent crimes and tragedies for victims and communities. The purpose of this Act is to enhance public safety by restricting unsecured pretrial release (including personal bonds or cashless bail) for certain violent offenses and repeat offenders, increasing judicial oversight in release decisions, and mandating mental health evaluations with options for involuntary commitment when a defendant poses a risk due to mental illness.
Section 3. Amendments to Code of Criminal Procedure – Pretrial Release Restrictions
Chapter 17 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure is amended to prohibit or severely limit unsecured pretrial release (such as release on personal bond, written promise to appear, or other non-monetary conditions without sufficient surety) for defendants charged with:
• Violent felony offenses, including but not limited to murder, aggravated assault, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated kidnapping, or any offense involving the use or exhibition of a deadly weapon.
• Any felony offense if the defendant has a prior conviction for a violent felony or was on bail or pretrial release for a violent offense at the time of the new alleged offense.
• Any offense classified as a state jail felony or higher if the defendant has multiple prior convictions indicating a pattern of criminal behavior posing a risk to public safety.
In such cases:
• A magistrate or judge may only grant pretrial release upon posting of sufficient secured bail (cash or surety bond) in an amount adequate to ensure appearance and community safety.
• Unsecured release options are prohibited unless the judge makes specific written findings that the defendant poses no danger to any person or the community and is likely to appear, supported by clear and convincing evidence. Such findings must be reviewed and approved by a district judge within 48 hours.
This section applies to initial appearances and bail hearings on or after the effective date of this Act.
Section 4. Increased Judicial Oversight in Pretrial Release
Magistrates setting conditions of release must:
• Make written findings of fact justifying any release decision, including assessment of flight risk, danger to victims or the community, criminal history, and ties to the community.
• Failure to make required written findings is grounds for disciplinary review, suspension, or removal of the magistrate, except for a first incident which may result in warning or training only.
• All pretrial release decisions for violent offenses must be reviewed by a district judge upon request of the prosecuting attorney or within 72 hours if the defendant remains detained.
Prosecuting attorneys shall have the right to present evidence and argue against unsecured release at any bail hearing.
Section 5. Mandatory Mental Health Evaluations and Involuntary Commitment
In any case where a defendant is charged with a violent offense and there is probable cause to believe the defendant suffers from mental illness that substantially impairs their ability to appreciate the wrongfulness of their conduct or poses a continuing danger:
• The court shall order a prompt mental health evaluation by a qualified mental health professional within 48 hours of arrest or initial appearance.
• If the evaluation indicates the defendant meets criteria for involuntary commitment under Chapter 573 or 574 of the Texas Health and Safety Code (including substantial risk of serious harm to self or others due to mental illness), the court may order temporary involuntary commitment to an inpatient mental health facility pending trial, in lieu of or in addition to other pretrial detention.
• The defendant shall remain in custody pending the commitment hearing, which must occur within 14 days (extendable for good cause).
• Procedures for such commitments shall follow existing involuntary commitment laws but prioritize public safety and allow input from victims or prosecutors.
This section ensures that defendants found incapable of proceeding due to mental illness receive appropriate treatment while protecting the community from release without safeguards.
Section 6. Severability
If any provision of this Act is held invalid, the remainder shall remain in effect.
Section 7. Effective Date
This Act takes effect February 1, 2026, or if such date has already passed, on the first day of the month following its passage, and applies to offenses committed on or after that date, as well as pretrial proceedings initiated thereafter.
Debate is now open for this bill for 72 hours.
- Begins (UTC): 2026-03-19T13:00:00Z
- Ends (UTC): 2026-03-22T13:00:00Z
Please keep discussion on-topic and substantive. After debate closes, voting will automatically begin.
Mr. President,
Iryna Zarutska was a refugee who fled war-torn Ukraine to the United States of America after the Russians bombed her neighborhood. Ms. Zarutska then proceeded to act, as far as public record can show, as a model citizen. She contributed to her community. She began to learn English. She got a job to pay her way through school. She was on her way home from a late shift at her job—at a pizzeria in Charlotte—on public transportation, surrounded by people, when her life was savagely stolen from her.
Decarlos Dejuan Brown Jr. was sitting behind Iryna. This was a man very much the opposite of Iryna. She was a new arrival, but a model of behavior and good work. Brown is an American citizen, and before this incident, he had been arrested 14 times going all the way back to 2007. He had been convicted of breaking and entering. He was arrested for armed robbery and possession of a firearm by a felon, and convicted for the same. He couldn’t stay in his own family’s home because he was violent and threatening. He was clearly highly and dangerously mentally ill, and he wouldn’t take medications that would help him. In short, he was a known threat to the safety of everyone around him, but Brown was let out of prison and was never involuntarily committed. These decisions by the state proved deadly on August 22, 2025.
That night, Brown spent several hours just riding around on public transportation, behaving erratically and laughing to himself like a madman. He didn’t even have a ticket to ride, but he went unconfronted by security officials. When Iryna boarded and sat in front of him, she should have had no need to worry. This was not the case, a tremendous failure of our systems. Brown stood up, whipped out a pocket knife, and without any warning or provocation, he stabbed Iryna several times from behind. She remained conscious for a minute afterwards before collapsing from loss of blood. Imagine the horror. Imagine the pain. Imagine the shock. No one helped her until after she collapsed. Help arrived too late—she was pronounced dead at the scene. What did Brown have to say for himself? “I got that white girl.”
Colleagues, what are we doing to our own people? What are we doing to the people we graciously allow to live here in asylum? To my friends across the aisle, how can any of us expect people to buy in to public transportation while this is a threat? How can we expect anyone to take promises of gun control and safety seriously when this is the result? How can any of us have any credibility in governance while our governments actively let violent, insane, known thugs walk around freely, terrorizing and brutalizing normal people? How is it that Iryna Zarutska could survive Russian bombardment but not a simple late-night train ride in a large American city?
When is it too ridiculous? When can we finally say that enough is enough, and we aren’t going to treat violent offenders with kid gloves anymore? Brown, the murderer in this case, was let out on his own recognizance by a leftist activist local judge not long before he went on to kill Iryna. If she had used an ounce of common sense and kept him locked up, she wouldn’t be dead. It’s time to wake up from the dreams of utopia. It’s time to recognize reality. It’s time to get tough. It’s time to stop the madness. It’s past time.
This bill will enact common-sense measures that crack down on the worst offenders in our society, people who have more than demonstrated they have no interest in being productive, law-abiding citizens who will have due regard for the safety and lives of others. It’s not really just about what they deserve, Mr. President, it’s about what normal, hard-working, kind, good people deserve. For the last couple of decades, and even longer in many cases, we have toyed with this ridiculous notion that hasn’t materialized in any substantive way, that we can remake any man, that we are all blank slates purely formed by circumstance, that all evil is cleanly the result of easily-identifiable injustices, that personal accountability is old-fashioned, that justice for the tyrants of the street is cruel and wrong. It’s time to put that to bed.
Join me in passing this bill. Send it to my desk. Together, we can and we will make Texas’s streets safe for everyone to the best of our ability. Now is the time to live up to our fundamental obligations as servants of the people. Thank you, and God bless.
I yield.
+ React
Quick reactions
Compose
Only active members of the legislature may post in debate. Viewing and reactions are public.
