← Back to bills and search results
2025 · Regular session · Senate bill
SB487
SB487 extends an existing victim-privacy process to alleged invasive visual recording and indecent assault.
Official caption: Relating to the confidentiality of identifying information of victims of certain offenses.
Official report lists Senate author(s): Alvarado. 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.
- SB487 extends an existing victim-privacy process to alleged invasive visual recording and indecent assault.
- A covered victim may choose a pseudonym—a substitute name—for public files and records, including police summaries, press releases and judicial records.
- Confidentiality has limits.
- A separate existing rule protects identifying information of covered victims younger than 17, subject to other law, court orders and investigation, prosecution or defense needs.
What does it do?
SB487 extends an existing victim-privacy process to alleged invasive visual recording and indecent assault. Previously, this part of the Code of Criminal Procedure covered stalking and offenses in the same criminal episode as stalking. It now also covers the two added offenses and other offenses in the same criminal episode as any of the three. A conviction is not required by the definition, which refers to an offense that allegedly constitutes the listed crime. Signed May 13, 2025, the act took effect September 1, 2025. Expanded definition; History.
A covered victim may choose a pseudonym—a substitute name—for public files and records, including police summaries, press releases and judicial records. The victim elects this protection by completing the attorney general’s pseudonym form and returning it to the investigating law-enforcement agency. The agency must substitute the name in its records, notify the prosecutor, provide the victim a copy and protect the form; the prosecutor must use the pseudonym in legal proceedings. This is not an automatic erasure of every mention of the victim. Choosing a pseudonym; Agency and prosecutor duties.
Confidentiality has limits. The completed form may be disclosed to the identified victim, defendant or defense attorney without the special court finding; other disclosure requires a court order. A court may order identifying information disclosed when it is essential at trial, the victim’s identity is in issue or disclosure serves the victim’s best interest. Form access; Court-ordered disclosure.
A separate existing rule protects identifying information of covered victims younger than 17, subject to other law, court orders and investigation, prosecution or defense needs. It excludes the victim’s own disclosures and generally those of a parent, conservator or guardian—unless that adult allegedly committed the offense. Existing Class C misdemeanor provisions address specified knowing disclosures, with their own conditions and defenses. SB487 expands the victims covered; it does not replace those limits or make confidentiality absolute. Child-victim protection; Disclosure offense and defenses.
What changed along the way?
All five posted versions have the same operative provisions. Both committees reported the bill without amendments, and the official floor-amendment index is empty. The enacted changes are the subchapter heading and expanded victim definition, not a new pseudonym procedure invented in a later amendment. All versions; Amendment 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?
The added victims gain access to privacy protections that can reduce public exposure during a criminal case. Police and prosecutors must apply the existing record-handling rules to a wider group. The law does not guarantee anonymity from the defendant, remove material already circulating online, or provide damages or compensation. Expanded coverage; Process and limits.
The March 16 introduced and April 22 engrossed fiscal notes anticipate no significant state or local fiscal impact and assume costs can be absorbed with existing resources. The April 22 criminal-justice statement anticipates no significant state correctional impact; it does not say privacy harms have been eliminated or quantify how many victims will use pseudonyms. Latest fiscal note; Criminal-justice impact statement.
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.