2025 Texas sessionsRegular and both called sessions have ended. This index covers House and Senate bills, not resolutions. Statuses come from official reports.

← Back to bills

2025 · Regular session · House bill

HB128

HB128 bars Texas state agencies and political subdivisions from establishing, maintaining or renewing a covered sister-city agreement with China, Iran, North Korea, Russia, or a community in one of those countries.

Read bill highlights ↓

Official caption: Relating to certain sister-city agreements between governmental entities and foreign countries and communities.

Signed by governorSource-checked explanation published

Official report lists House author(s): Orr, Hefner, McLaughlin. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.

Report an error ↗

Bill explanation published · Version and amendment review scope is stated below · Individual amendment records may not be separately annotated.

Bill highlights

Selected points from the published explanation. Follow each point to its source-linked context; conditions and limits may matter.

Read the full explanation ↓

What does it do?

HB128 bars Texas state agencies and political subdivisions from establishing, maintaining or renewing a covered sister-city agreement with China, Iran, North Korea, Russia, or a community in one of those countries. The restriction also reaches countries designated by the governor as threats to critical infrastructure under Government Code Chapter 2275. It is not a ban on every international agreement or private cultural exchange. Final law; official history.

Which agreements qualify? All three parts of the statutory definition matter: the agreement is between a Texas governmental entity and a foreign country or community; it is recognized by a tax-exempt nonprofit serving as the national membership organization for individual sister cities, counties and states; and it commits the parties to cultural/educational exchanges, tourism and other bilateral cooperation. The law’s governmental scope includes state boards, commissions, departments, institutions and officers with statewide jurisdiction—including state colleges/universities—as well as political subdivisions. Final law, Section 795.001; state-agency definition.

Existing agreements had a withdrawal deadline. Entities that were parties to a prohibited agreement on September 1, 2025 had to withdraw by October 1, 2025. The temporary withdrawal section expires January 1, 2027; the ongoing ban on establishing, maintaining or renewing those agreements does not expire with it. This review does not establish that any particular city actually withdrew. Final law, Sections 795.003–.004.

Other relationships are encouraged, not mandated. The law states a policy favoring sister-city agreements with U.S. allies, expressly including federally designated major non-NATO allies and Taiwan. It does not require a city to create a new partnership, appropriate money for one, or itself add countries to the federal ally list. For additional prohibited countries, the referenced governor-designation process requires public-safety consultation and consultation with the Homeland Security Council; the four countries expressly named in HB128 do not depend on a new designation. Final law, Sections 795.001–.002; referenced designation process.

What changed along the way?

The introduced, House committee, engrossed, Senate committee and enrolled texts have the same substantive provisions. The official amendment index says the bill has no amendments; both committees reported it without amendments. There is no floor-amendment proposal or conference compromise to summarize. Printing markers and enrollment certifications are not policy changes. All text versions; amendment index; introduced text; final text.

For the full amendment record, open the official amendment index.

Official bill versions

Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.

Who could benefit—and who could bear the costs?

Potential benefits: state and local governments receive a common rule for avoiding officially recognized partnerships with the named or designated adversaries. Communities pursuing partnerships with allies or Taiwan receive an express policy endorsement. The law does not demonstrate a measurable security or economic gain from either choice.

Burdens: affected governments must identify and end prohibited relationships; participating residents, schools, cultural groups and tourism partners may lose opportunities supported by those governmental agreements. Those possible losses are not quantified in the fiscal note, and the bill does not prohibit every private connection with people in the affected countries. It creates no express criminal offense, civil fine, new enforcement agency or compensation payment.

Fiscal estimate: the May 7 engrossed fiscal note anticipates no state fiscal implication and no significant local-government fiscal implication. The April 1 introduced note reaches the same conclusions. These are estimates, not a promise that withdrawal imposes no administrative work or opportunity cost on any community. The law makes no appropriation. Latest fiscal note; introduced fiscal note.

Review boundary: checked the final law, history, all five text versions, the no-amendment index, both indexed fiscal notes and the referenced state-law definitions/designation process. No particular municipality’s agreements, compliance, lost revenue or current governor-designation list was audited.

Official sources

Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.