2025 · Regular session · Senate bill
SB13
SB13 gives parents access to school library catalogs and checkout information, lets them restrict their own child’s borrowing, and creates district-wide procedures for purchases, donations and book challenges.
Official caption: Relating to a school district's library materials and catalog, the establishment of local school library advisory councils, and parental rights regarding public school library catalogs and access by the parent's child to library materials.
Official report lists Senate author(s): Paxton, Bettencourt, Birdwell, Campbell, Creighton, et al.. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.
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.
- SB13 gives parents access to school library catalogs and checkout information, lets them restrict their own child’s borrowing, and creates district-wide procedures for purchases, donations and book challenges.
- Districts and open-enrollment charter schools must let parents inspect available library catalogs and submit a list of materials their own child may not check out or otherwise use outside the school library.
- A separate district challenge can be filed by a student’s parent or person standing in parental relation, a district employee or a district resident.
- A district may establish a library advisory council.
- Councils meet at least twice yearly and as needed.
- Trustees must approve purchases and donations, normally after a public list has been available for at least 30 days, at their first open meeting on or after day 30.
What does it do?
What SB13 changes
SB13 gives parents access to school library catalogs and checkout information, lets them restrict their own child’s borrowing, and creates district-wide procedures for purchases, donations and book challenges. It adds content restrictions and parent-majority advisory councils, but does not require every district to establish a council automatically. Signed June 20, 2025, it took effect September 1, 2025 and applies beginning with the 2025–26 school year. official history; final law.
A parent’s restriction and a district-wide challenge are different
Districts and open-enrollment charter schools must let parents inspect available library catalogs and submit a list of materials their own child may not check out or otherwise use outside the school library. Submission must be available through a physical/electronic form or an online portal. Schools using a learning-management system or online learning portal must give parents a record each time their child checks out or otherwise uses library material outside the library, showing title, author, genre and return date, as applicable. The act also adds library checkout records to parents’ access rights. final law, Sections 1 and 4, Education Code 33.023–.024.
A separate district challenge can be filed by a student’s parent or person standing in parental relation, a district employee or a district resident. The required state form must identify how the material violates library standards. Unlike a parent’s own-child list, a challenge blocks access by all district students until the district acts. If trustees remove a book, they must tell classroom teachers at the affected grade level to remove their classroom copies too. If trustees retain it, they need not act on another challenge during the following two years. final law, Section 33.027.
Councils, purchases and review
A district may establish a library advisory council. It must do so after a petition by parents of at least 10% of enrolled students or 50 parents, whichever is fewer, and must keep that council for at least three years. The council recommends; trustees make the decisions. It has at least five members, with each trustee appointing an equal number. A majority of voting members must be parents of district students who are not district employees, and one such parent chairs it. Nonvoting participants may include educators, counselors, administrators, business representatives and clergy. final law, Section 33.025.
Councils meet at least twice yearly and as needed. Meetings require 72-hour notice, minutes and audio or video recordings; records go to the district within 10 days and are posted online as soon as practicable, if the district has a website. Authorized book-review committees must also have at least five members, a nonemployee-parent majority and the same meeting safeguards. Districts without councils still must ensure that their addition/removal procedures comply with the library standards and the meeting, minutes, recording and posting requirements of Sections 33.025(g)–(h). final law, Sections 33.025 and 33.027.
Trustees must approve purchases and donations, normally after a public list has been available for at least 30 days, at their first open meeting on or after day 30. A council, if established, advises before that meeting. Donated books cannot be made available to students before the required grade-level approval. Exceptions cover replacement of damaged copies, extra copies already in the catalog, and titles previously approved for the same grade levels—but each exception requires the same International Standard Book Number, not merely the same series or similar title. final law, Section 33.026.
Challenges go to an existing council within five days; the council has 90 days from receipt to recommend action. Trustees act at the first open meeting after the district’s 90th day following receipt or, where applicable, after the council’s recommendation. Appeals go to the first open meeting after filing. This is not a simple promise of a final decision within 90 calendar days. Trustees must consider applicable council advice, grade/subject suitability, library standards and relevant expert reviews. final law, Section 33.027.
Content rules and important limits
New restrictions cover library material with “indecent” content—patently offensive portrayals of sexual or excretory organs or activities—or “profane” content, defined as grossly offensive language considered a public nuisance. They also cover materials directing a reader, including by link or QR code, to a website containing prohibited content. Standards extend to classroom libraries, online catalogs, mobile applications and other library catalogs students can access. The act retains the prohibition on removal based solely on ideas or the personal background of authors or characters. final law, Sections 2–3.
The definition of library material excludes instructional material and materials procured for the TexShare consortium. A separate safeguard says the law must not be construed to limit acquisition of instructional material, as defined by Education Code 31.002, necessary to teach or demonstrate knowledge of the state’s essential knowledge and skills. Existing “harmful material” law is a distinct test, not a synonym for any offensive passage. The council’s final removal-recommendation language ties local values/age appropriateness to harmful or indecent/profane material, rather than retaining the House committee’s separate local-values-only ground. final law, Sections 33.020–.021 and 33.025(d).
The reference to vendor-rated sexually explicit material was already in prior law; SB13 did not invent that rating scheme. A January 17, 2024 Fifth Circuit opinion upheld preliminary relief against the education commissioner over HB900’s vendor-rating system while explaining that the Chapter 33 library standards were not enjoined or at issue in that appeal. Full-court rehearing was denied April 16, 2024. Those older decisions are not a ruling on SB13 or proof that every retained statutory provision is currently enforceable.
The act directs the state library commission to adopt standards by April 1, 2026 and TEA to provide a model acquisition policy as soon as practicable after effectiveness. It separately directs districts to adopt acquisition policies before the first day of 2025–26, despite the recorded September 1 effective date; those are the text’s two dates, not evidence of an earlier effective date. It contains a broad severability clause and prevails over conflicting nonsubstantive code corrections from the same session. final law, Sections 5–11.
What changed along the way?
What changed during passage
The five posted versions moved from mandatory councils in the Senate plan to optional councils triggered by a petition in the House. The House committee threshold was parents of 20% of students; the final compromise lowered it to 10% or 50 parents, whichever is fewer. The Senate substitute added website/QR restrictions and same-ISBN purchase exceptions. The full conference report in the May 30 Senate journal matches the final operative text. Both chambers adopted it May 31. official history.
The adopted Paxton Senate amendment F1 added meetings as needed and open-meeting decision timing for purchases, challenges and appeals. The adopted Buckley House amendment 1 added the state-curriculum safeguard and revised council removal recommendations; those survive. But its exception for new titles in an existing series and its replacement of the all-student challenge hold with parental notification do not survive the final compromise.
Three House proposals were tabled: Zwiener amendment 2 deleting the indecent/profane definitions and related restrictions/recommendation language; Hinojosa amendment 3 expressly measuring indecent/profane content against prevailing community standards for the relevant ages; and Gámez amendment 4 adding a contextual-reading safeguard. The printed House version, pages 2–4 and 6, establishes the line-deletion targets. These proposals are not enacted language.
The adopted Cunningham amendment 5 allows instructional-materials and technology allotment funds to pay costs of the catalog-access/parent-specific restriction section. Money amendment 6, a 50-parent council trigger coupled with a requirement that the relevant parent members had petitioned, failed. The final compromise separately uses 50 as an alternative threshold without that petitioner-membership requirement. Venton Jones amendment 7, expressly forbidding council recommendations based solely on ideas or author/character backgrounds, was tabled; the preexisting collection-standard protection against removal on those grounds remains.
Patterson amendment 8 proposed appeals to the State Board of Education, three-week state review, and state approved/rejected lists with grade-level consequences. It was withdrawn. Final SB13 instead uses local trustee appeals. The conference restored parent-majority review committees and the all-student challenge hold, omitted the House’s additional standalone “sexually explicit material” category while retaining the older vendor-rated category, and kept narrow same-ISBN purchase exceptions. All nine amendment dispositions; full conference report in the May 30 Senate journal; final law.
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?
Benefits, burdens and public cost
Parents gain clearer information and an enforceable way to restrict their own child’s borrowing. Public purchase lists and parent-majority review structures make decisions more visible. Students can also lose access while any eligible challenge is pending, even if their own parents want access. Boards, librarians and staff face catalog, notification, meeting and review work; narrow purchase exceptions avoid repeating some approvals. These are likely practical effects of the procedures, not measured learning outcomes or a quantified savings estimate. final law.
The May 30 conference/final fiscal note anticipates no significant state fiscal impact and assumes state agencies can absorb costs with existing resources. It does anticipate local costs for parent notices and notification systems, including personnel and training, without a statewide dollar estimate. “No significant state impact” does not mean no local cost or new money provided to districts.
All seven posted fiscal notes were reviewed. The engrossed note also identified council meeting, recording and posting costs when councils were mandatory statewide. The final note no longer lists that paragraph after the council design changed, but councils actually established still have duties. Its notification discussion describes agency cost assumptions; the precise final portal-record and catalog-access duties are those in Sections 33.023–.024, not a universal email requirement. The allotment permission permits use of an existing funding source for Section 33.023 compliance; it is not a new appropriation. final law; final fiscal note.
Review scope: full final law and conference text, official history, all five versions, nine amendment texts and outcomes, seven fiscal postings, relevant pre-effective statutes and the cited dated court decisions. The court discussion is limited to the older vendor-rating dispute, not a certification of all later litigation.
Official sources
- Bill history and latest recorded action
- Bill versions, analyses and fiscal notes
- Action history and votes
- Amendment index
Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.