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

2025 · Regular session · House bill

HB5509

HB5509 allows a city's governing body to suspend or revoke a hotel's certificate of occupancy for human trafficking activity only when all three statutory conditions are met: a law-enforcement officer supplies a sworn probable-ca…

Read bill highlights ↓

Official caption: Relating to the suspension or revocation of a hotel's certificate of occupancy by a municipality for suspected human trafficking.

Signed by governorSource-checked explanation published

Official report lists House author(s): Bumgarner, Rosenthal, Leo Wilson, Thompson, Isaac. 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.

HB5509 allows a city's governing body to suspend or revoke a hotel's certificate of occupancy for human trafficking activity only when all three statutory conditions are met: a law-enforcement officer supplies a sworn probable-cause affidavit that criminal human trafficking is occurring there; a court with criminal jurisdiction in the hotel's county issues an order finding probable cause; and the city follows the specified occupancy-certificate procedures before acting.
The procedures must be consistent with those used to suspend or revoke occupancy certificates for other businesses or land uses in that city.
“Human trafficking activity” means conduct constituting the offenses in Penal Code 20A.02 or 20A.03, rather than every offense or suspected problem at a hotel. “Hotel” uses Tax Code 156.001's definition, which includes motels, inns, rooming houses and bed-and-breakfasts; its exclusions include hospitals, nursing homes and qualifying institution-operated educational housing.

Read the full explanation ↓

What does it do?

HB5509 allows a city’s governing body to suspend or revoke a hotel’s certificate of occupancy for human trafficking activity only when all three statutory conditions are met: a law-enforcement officer supplies a sworn probable-cause affidavit that criminal human trafficking is occurring there; a court with criminal jurisdiction in the hotel’s county issues an order finding probable cause; and the city follows the specified occupancy-certificate procedures before acting. An investigation or the city’s suspicion alone is not the final law’s test. The city has discretion; suspension or revocation is not automatic. Final law, new Local Government Code 215.007(b).

The procedures must be consistent with those used to suspend or revoke occupancy certificates for other businesses or land uses in that city. The act does not limit an owner’s or operator’s right to a public hearing and to present evidence. It also creates no private cause of action—no new right for a private person to sue under this section. A probable-cause finding is not a criminal conviction, and the law does not require a conviction first. Final law, 215.007(c)–(e).

“Human trafficking activity” means conduct constituting the offenses in Penal Code 20A.02 or 20A.03, rather than every offense or suspected problem at a hotel. “Hotel” uses Tax Code 156.001’s definition, which includes motels, inns, rooming houses and bed-and-breakfasts; its exclusions include hospitals, nursing homes and qualifying institution-operated educational housing. HB5509 does not rewrite the underlying trafficking offenses or their penalties. It took effect September 1, 2025. Final law, definition and effective date; hotel definition; official history.

What changed along the way?

The introduced bill would have allowed city action when the city learned of a law-enforcement trafficking investigation or had reasonable cause to believe a Chapter 20A offense was occurring at a hotel or motel. The House committee substitute retained those triggers but adopted the Tax Code hotel definition, protected hearing/evidence rights, required consistent municipal procedures and disclaimed a private cause of action. Introduced; House substitute.

The sole indexed floor amendment, offered by Bumgarner on third reading and adopted May 16, added the specific 20A.02/20A.03 definition and replaced the investigation/reasonable-cause alternatives with both the officer’s affidavit and the criminal court’s probable-cause order. All three amendment instructions survive in the House-passed and final wording. The Senate committee substitute then made compliance with municipal procedures an explicit third condition that must occur before suspension or revocation. The House concurred May 30. The Senate change was a committee substitute, not a separately indexed floor amendment. Complete amendment; amendment index; House-passed; Senate substitute; version index.

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?

Cities gain a defined tool for responding to trafficking at hotels, potentially protecting victims and nearby communities. Hotel owners and operators face possible loss or suspension of occupancy authority, but the final law requires a sworn law-enforcement basis, an independent court finding and municipal procedures. Guests and workers could also be affected by a closure. The sources do not quantify those private impacts or establish how much trafficking this measure will prevent.

The final-posted fiscal note, May 29 and labeled “As Passed 2nd House,” anticipates no state fiscal implication and no significant local-government fiscal implication. The introduced, House-substitute, engrossed and Senate-substitute notes give the same conclusions. They provide no dollar estimate, multi-year table or estimate of a hotel’s lost revenue. The act makes no appropriation. Final-posted fiscal note; introduced; House substitute; engrossed; Senate substitute.

Review boundary: both final sections, history, all five text versions, all instructions and the disposition of the one indexed floor amendment, all indexed fiscal notes and referenced statutory definitions were read and compared. This is not an audit of a city’s hearing rules, a particular hotel’s conduct, or all concurrent changes to the criminal trafficking statutes.

Official sources

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