On Wednesday, a slew of Texans made the drive to Austin to require that a state committee looking into allegations of criminal misconduct do more to prosecute judges, end alleged conflicts of interest, and promote clarity in both courtrooms and the commission’s individual proceedings.
The Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct (SCJC) typically convenes behind closed doors to consider proper grievances and determine sanctions, but it is required to hold a public hearing every other year for members of the public to raise concerns.
On Wednesday, about 50 individuals testified before the 13-member SCJC, with many expressing concerns about certain magistrates and complaints that parents had experienced unfair treatment in child custody cases.
Witnesses also described judges who collected campaign contributions from clients ‘ attorneys, a judge’s spouse being the financial expert for the opposing party, fees for more than$ 20,000 in court transcripts, and months of waiting for a judge to rule after a hearing.
Robert Garza, a resident of Texas, suggested that state lawmakers set deadlines and regulate fees after telling the fee that many of the system’s issues were the result of judges “violating their discretion.”
Courts are violating their discretion, Garza said, which many people are discussing now. They are “making up the rules,” they claim. One of the worst state I’ve sat in home courts has been Texas.
According to Garza, one of his suggestions is to involve courts to rule within 10 business days of a reading. According to him, his proposed bill does not reduce administrative discretion because it would permit a judge to postpone an order if the judge gives a justification for the extra time needed every ten business days.
Garza claimed in his own case that after his ex-wife reportedly hampered his court-ordered child custody, he filed with both civil and criminal courts. He also had to hire an attorney, spend$ 5, 000, and wait six months for a hearing.
” I anticipated that the judge would make a decision, but a month, two months passed, and I was like, where’s the judgement,” I said. Then I looked into the script, where there is no provision requiring the judge to render a decision within a specified deadline, he told The Texan.
When an administrative judge or the Texas Supreme Court determines that a lower court judge abused their choice, Garza suggests that the SCJC automatically refer the case to the SCJC.
In addition to enacting reform bills like Senate Bill ( SB ) 718 in 2023 to address false allegations in child custody cases and SB 2794 in 2025, which increase criminal penalties for parents who knowingly interfere with court-ordered custody or visitation, Garza has worked with Texas lawmakers to support them. State Senator Angela Paxton (R-McKinney ) wrote both bills.
” I’ve been in the home court system for 17 years, and I’ve found answers to a lot of the problems.” In all 50 states, Garza said,” My costs have been approved or proposed.” ” I’ve changed 14 different bills to fit every state code,” writes the author,” so advocates you simply get their state, go in, and go to their legislator.”
Texas needs to employ transparency measures, according to Jennifer Lundy of Texans for Judicial Accountability.
” Texas has a lot of wonderful, trustworthy courts. We are providing new tools to the 90th [Texas ] Legislature for the select few who are not,” Lundy said. The Access Act, which improves court costs by putting stable systems in place, places audio and video in our courts.
Lundy claimed that state senator Bob Hall (R-Rockwall ) has consented to carry the bill, which protects “honest judges from false accusations” as well as protecting litigants from” corrupt judges.”
Lundy advocated for the expansion of SCJC reforms, which were approved last year, to allow online complaints and release SCJC proceedings and guilt verdicts within 30 days. She added that when a lawyer in a case donates to the presiding jury’s election campaign, the state does mandate that litigants receive financial disclosures.
In 2025, state legislators increased the SCJC’s membership from five to seven and revoked the Texas State Bar’s appointing power. The Texas Supreme Court nominates six directors.
Some testimony argued that the SCJC hasn’t been able to appoint courts despite having compelling arguments.
Judge Melissa Morris, a judge in Harris County District Court, received people sanctions earlier this year for granting “unsatisfactory” parole to defendants who admitted to sex crimes involving kids and violated grand jury secrecy. She may remain in office.
District Court Judge Natalia Cornelio fought the SCJC’s people rebuke for her arrest of Ronald Lee Haskell, a death row inmate, in July. Cornelio is no longer eligible to serve as a visiting judge.
Taran Champagne complained that the committee had prohibited recording the people gathering in response to some common witness that targeted the SCJC itself.
A person in attendance may record all or any portion of a government body’s open meeting using a recorder, digital camera, or any other means of dental or physical reproduction, according to Champagne in Texas Open Meetings Act Subsection 8.
SCJC maintains a public sessions record, and it has online access to replays of earlier sessions. The SCJC Chair Gary Steel stated at the 2024 people gathering that taking pictures or taking videos of the reading was against the law.
The SCJC open meeting is held in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which prohibits video surveillance in courtroom proceedings. Neither a prosecution nor an oral debate are held at the SCJC.
