texas-lawmakers-advance-‘kyle’s-law’-to-strengthen-self-defense-protections-for-gun-owners

Texas Lawmakers Advance ‘Kyle’s Law’ to Strengthen Self-Defense Protections for Gun Owners Leave a comment

Armed Defender Ends Attack on the Road, iStock-1354934183
Texas Lawmakers Advance ‘Kyle’s Law’ to Strengthen Self-Defense Protections for Gun Owners, iStock-1354934183

A self-defense victory in criminal court doesn’t always mean freedom—just ask Kyle Rittenhouse. Texas lawmakers want to fix that with a new law.

Texas House Bill 170, also known as “Kyle’s Law,” amends existing Texas law to provide comprehensive civil immunity for individuals who are cleared of criminal charges after using force or threats of force in self-defense. Under the bill, Texans who are not indicted by a grand jury, have charges dismissed or are acquitted at trial would be shielded from civil liability arising from their actions. 

This immunity extends not only to the use of force but also to threats of force deemed justified under Chapter 9 of the Texas Penal Code, which outlines self-defense protections.  Defendants who prevail in civil lawsuits filed against them after being cleared criminally may also recoup attorney’s fees, court costs, lost income, and other litigation-related expenses. This measure aims to deter politically motivated or frivolous lawsuits designed to bankrupt individuals who lawfully defend themselves.

The bill is indirectly linked to Rittenhouse, whose 2020 self-defense case in Kenosha, Wisconsin, resulted in his acquittal but led to ongoing civil litigation. In this case, Rittenhouse shot three men in self-defense when he went to the town to protect its local businesses and provide first aid during the unrest following the police shooting of Jacob Blake. Rittenhouse notably faced two counts of homicide and one count of attempted homicide that he was eventually acquitted of.

Rittenhouse himself has emerged as a vocal advocate for gun rights in Texas, testifying last month in support of SB 1362, an anti-red flag bill aimed at red flag laws. 

Although HB 170 wouldn’t apply to Rittenhouse’s case due to the jurisdiction, it is designed to prevent similar legal and financial burdens for Texans in self-defense situations. HB 170’s supporters emphasize that the bill is designed to protect individuals from being “punished twice” — first by criminal prosecution and then by civil litigation — regardless of public opinion about specific cases.

The bill advanced through the House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence Committee on March 26. 

HB 170 is part of a broader push by Texas Republicans to strengthen self-defense and Second Amendment rights. Authored by State Rep. Ryan Guillen (R–Rio Grande City) and supported by 19 co-authors, including prominent conservatives such as Briscoe Cain and Shelley Luther.

The bill has a Senate companion, SB 1730, filed by Senator Bob Hall (R–Edgewood), underscores the coordinated effort to pass these protections. Both bills also draw inspiration from the case of Kyle Carruth, a Lubbock man who incurred over $500,000 in legal fees after being sued civilly following a 2021 shooting deemed justified by a grand jury. 

The incident took place at Carruth’s Lubbock residence, which also served as his business office, during an argument over custody arrangements between Carruth’s girlfriend, Christina Read and her ex-husband Chad Read. Carruth retrieved a rifle during the altercation, fired a warning shot at Read’s feet, and later shot him twice after a physical struggle over the weapon. While HB 170 would not retroactively aid Carruth, its proponents argue it would prevent similar outcomes for future defendants. 

AmmoLand reached out to Texas Gun Rights President Chris McNutt for his thoughts on the aforementioned legislation. He succinctly stated, “Individuals who are acquitted or never even charged for using their God-given right to self-defense shouldn’t be subjected to financial ruin. “

During committee hearings, McNutt has consistently framed the legislation as essential to preserving the practical exercise of self-defense. “You don’t really have a Second Amendment if you can’t afford to use it,” he declared. 

If passed, the bill could set a precedent nationwide: One where self-defense doesn’t come with a second trial and a six-figure invoice.


About José Niño

José Niño is a freelance writer based in Austin, Texas. You can contact him via Facebook and X/Twitter. Subscribe to his Substack newsletter by visiting “Jose Nino Unfiltered” on Substack.com.

José Niño

Leave a Reply

SHOPPING CART

close