In a rare show of bipartisan cooperation, the Texas House on Tuesday overwhelmingly approved a long-anticipated judicial reform package that raises judges’ pay for the first time in over a decade and implements sweeping changes to the state’s judicial oversight system. Senate Bill 293 and its companion constitutional amendment, Senate Joint Resolution 27, passed with broad support and now head back to the Senate for final approval.
“This is a big bill, and it’s one that your judges deserved and worked hard for and waited too long for,” said Rep. Jeff Leach (R-Plano) during the Memorial Day session where the measure was brought to the floor.
Significant Pay Increase for Judges
At the heart of SB 293, authored by Sen. Joan Huffman (R-Houston), is a 25% salary increase for district court judges—from $140,000 to $175,000 annually. While slightly below the 30% hike requested by Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Jimmy Blacklock, the approved increase surpasses the Senate’s earlier 15% proposal.
Supporters say the raise is long overdue and essential for retaining judicial talent amid growing workloads and rising living costs in many parts of Texas.
New Transparency and Reporting Standards
Beyond compensation, SB 293 introduces new transparency requirements for judges. Beginning next year, all judges will be required to report the hours they spend on courtroom and judicial duties twice annually—each July and January. These reports will be compiled and sent to the governor, lieutenant governor, House speaker, and relevant legislative committees.
The aim, proponents say, is to ensure greater accountability and provide insight into the functioning of the state’s judiciary.
Restructuring Judicial Oversight: SJR 27
Paired with SB 293 is the more controversial SJR 27, a proposed constitutional amendment that reshapes the State Commission on Judicial Conduct (SCJC)—the body responsible for investigating judicial misconduct. Among the key changes:
The governor would appoint seven of the 13 SCJC members.
The Texas Supreme Court (SCOTX) would appoint the remaining six, including four judges, one justice of the peace, and one municipal judge.
The State Bar of Texas, which previously appointed three members, would no longer have a role in the commission’s composition.
Two of the SCOTX appointees must be trial court judges.
The governor's appointees must be lay citizens—not judges or attorneys.
Critics, including Rep. Gene Wu (D-Houston), raised alarms about the potential politicization of judicial discipline, warning that greater executive control could undermine judicial independence.
“This is an important issue about the separation of powers, about the independence of our judiciary,” Wu said, unsuccessfully attempting to amend the resolution to preserve more peer oversight.
Public Sanctions and Longer Investigations
SJR 27 also adjusts how and when judges can be reprimanded. While private reprimands remain possible, public sanctions are now required for “willful or persistent conduct that is clearly inconsistent with the proper performance of a judge’s duties.”
To address long-standing complaints about slow investigations, SB 293 expands the statute of limitations for complaints to seven years and imposes penalties—up to $10,000—for knowingly filing false complaints.
Recent cases, including the protracted investigation of Judge Franklin Bynum—whose disciplinary case dragged on years and concluded only after he left office—have sparked public frustration over the SCJC’s slow processes and lack of transparency. Though the SCJC meets monthly, its internal proceedings remain closed to the public.
Voter Approval Still Needed
Despite some concerns, the House passed SB 293 in a 129–4 vote. SJR 27, which required a two-thirds majority, passed 119–17, with Democrats joining Republicans to push it across the line. Because it is a proposed constitutional amendment, SJR 27 must also be approved by Texas voters in the November 2025 general election.
Rep. Ann Johnson (D-Houston) supported the measure despite voicing concerns about the public scapegoating of judges in high-profile cases.
“My hope is also that by ensuring that the public is part of this process, that we free ourselves from this partisan game that we are seeing on social media to demonize our judges,” Johnson said, referencing recent criticism of Harris County Judge Hilary Unger’s bond decisions in cases involving violent offenders.
Next Steps
The Senate must now review and approve the House’s amendments to SB 293. Assuming the upper chamber concurs, judicial raises and reporting requirements could go into effect next year. As for the judicial oversight overhaul, Texas voters will have the final say in November 2025.
