My child's dad hasn't been around for years and he's behind on child support. The State is taking him to court to enforce the support arrearage, but how do I report to the court that he hasn't even visited his child for years?
After a somewhat quiet August on Capital Hill, there's been recent activity related to the old 2017 HPA and the more recent SHUSH Act.
First, the SHUSH Act has more cosponsors in the House and Senate with H.R. 3179 coming in at 18 cosponsors and S. 1505 at 8. The Senate version appears stuck in the Finance Committee while the House version has been in the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations since July 24th.
Although the SHUSH Act is thought by many to have supplanted the 2017 HPA, the Hearing Protection Act has gained a few new supporters expanding from 158 cosponsors in July to 165 today. As mentioned before, the 2017 HPA is languishing in the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations where it has been since February.
H.R. 367 now has 158 cosponsors, up from 127 in March. Among those cosponsors, the number of Democrat cosponsors has doubled. That's right. There are now FOUR Democrat cosponsors. Talk about bipartisan support, right? Other than this, the Bill is still languishing in committee, and there's been no action on the Senate version, S. 59.
However, a new Bill known as the SHUSH Act is moving through the House and Senate. This Bill would go even further than the Hearing Protection Act. You can read more about the SHUSH Act here.
There is already proposed legislation known as the Hearing Protection Act of 2017 which would remove the legal requirement of obtaining a tax stamp to purchase firearms silencers along with other application requirements. But the SHUSH Act would go further, removing silencers from National Firearms Act (NFA) requirements altogether.
If the SHUSH Act (H.R. 3139 and S. 1505) becomes law, firearms silencers would be classified as firearms accessories, eliminating the need for a even a background check or FFL licensee transfer. In other words, silencers could be bought and sold over the counter or mail-order just like anything else.
Since their introduction in the House and Senate on June 29th, there hasn't been much activity on the Bills. H.R. 3139, with 8 cosponsors, is in the Ways and Means and Judiciary Committees. S. 1505, with its 1 cosponsor, has been referred to the Finance Committee.
Check back or sign up for updates.
When we last updated you on Texas' Article V Convention of the States legislation, SB 21 calling for anicle V Convention of States had been sent to the Texas House, and an identical companion bill HB 506 was scheduled for public hearing Thursday, April 13th.
Last week, the House joined the Senate in passing Article V legislation making Texas, the 11th state to call for an Article V Convention. Texas joins Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Tennessee.
10 additional states have passed Article V legislation through one chamber, and Article V legislation has been introduced in 22 other states. It takes 34 states to trigger an Article V Convention of States. 11 have passed the resolution, 10 more have passed through one chamber, and 22 more have active legislation under consideration.
SB 21 calling for an Article V Convention of States was sent to the Texas House in March and was read and referred to the Select Committee on State & Federal Power & Responsibility today. The identical companion bill HB 506 is scheduled for public hearing this Thursday April 13th.
In gun law, a Bill is being considered that would eliminate the licensing requirement for the carrying of handguns in the state. HB 375 is pending in the Homeland Security & Public Safety Committee since March 28th.
In immigration law, SB 23 would require all Texas employers to use the e-verify system to ensure the workers they hire are legally authorized to work in the United States. SB 280 would empower Texas law enforcement officers to arrest illegal immigrants.
We've just learned that President Trump's political strategist, Steve Bannon, is out, and apparently, former Texas Governor Rick Perry will be taking his place on the President's National Security Council. Yehaw?
More information from Dallas Morning News.
Generally, defamation occurs when a person's reputation or good name is damaged in some way by another person's false statement. This statement can be printed in some manner (libel) or made orally (slander). Slander of title and business disparagement are two similar offenses that would typically occur in a different context related to property or business interests.
Current defamation law is the result of old common-law rules and more recent statutory provisions and First Amendment protections. The elements, or requirements, for a defamation claim depend on variables such as whether the parties are private persons or public entities, members of the press, whether the statement was written or oral, or whether the statement relates to something the public would have a need or a right to know.
Generally, in a defamation case we would look for a defendant who made a defamatory and false statement of fact about the plaintiff that caused the plaintiff a pecuniary injury. In other words, defamation typically occurred if 1) a person made a statement of fact, 2) about the plaintiff, that 3) was defamatory, and 4) false, and 5) caused the plaintiff injury. Regarding the false statement, it can be necessary to consider whether the defendant knew the statement was false or should have known the statement was false. In some instances, it might not matter whether the defendant knew or should have known the statement was false. Injury may also be presumed depending on the circumstances.
There is much more to consider: every defamation lawsuit is different. If you think you may be a victim of defamation, this can be a starting point. It is important to act quickly, however. In Texas, any lawsuit for defamation must be made within one year of the offense. If a victim waits too long, he or she will be barred, or prevented, from ever bringing the lawsuit. The good news for the potential plaintiff is that, according to current case law, each time a defamatory statement is brought to the attention of a third person, a new publication has occurred, and each publication becomes a separate action. Renfro Drug Co. v. Lawson, 160 S.W.2d 246, 251 (Tex.1942). This means, even if the original defamatory statement was made more than a year ago, while it's too late to sue for that publication, any republication of that statement is a new offense that can be grounds for a defamation lawsuit.
Since the last post, H.R. 367 has gained 19 additional cosponsors bringing the current total to 127. Of those 127, only 2 are Democrats (and both are from Texas) the most recent being Rep. Henry Cuellar. The Bill is still stuck in the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations, and there's been no action on the companion Senate Bill S. 59.
For previous posts and information, click here.
Those interested in supporting the HPA of 2017 can do so here.
The Texas Senate has just voted to adopt Senate Joint Resolution (SJR 2) calling for an Article V Convention of States to consider certain amendments to the United States Constitution. Shortly before the vote on SJR 2, the Texas Senate voted to adopt Senate Bill 21 (SB 21) which provides for the qualifications of Texas delegates and other guidelines in the event of an Article V Convention.
Texas is calling for an Article V Convention to impose fiscal restraints on the national government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the national government, and limit the terms of office of national officials and members of Congress. Another Article V Convention calling for a balanced budget amendment has already been passed by 28 states, 6 states away from the number needed to require the U.S. Congress to call an Article V Convention.
The texts of SB 21 and SJR 2, without amendments, are provided below. More information can be found on the Texas Legislature's website.
UPDATE: THE ENGROSSED VERSIONS (with amendments) OF SB 21 AND SJR 2 ARE INCLUDED BELOW.
Tomorrow, the Texas Senate is expected to vote on Senate Joint Resolution 2 (SJR 2) calling for a convention of states under Article V of the U.S. Constitution. The purpose of the Article V Convention would be to impose fiscal restraints on the national government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the national government, and limit the terms of office of national officials and members of Congress.
It's interesting to note that while the national government continues to spend beyond its means, 45 states have balanced budget requirements. States balance their budgets. We're expected to balance our budgets. Why should the national government, with all its power and responsibility, be free to act so irresponsibly?
The identical companion Bill, HJR 39, has gone nowhere since it was filed December, 06, 2016.
My wife made criminal accusations against me and filed for a divorce and TRO. The TRO affidavits were based on those criminal charges. Two years later, those criminal charges have been dismissed. How do I get the TRO dropped? Keep reading for more.
We were purchasing a home from a friend with owner financing. We were working on a contract, and the seller gave us all these details about the contract for purchasing this home. We have a few receipts with our names, date, amount, and saying, for purchase of house on [#### xxxx Rd., TX,] and the seller's signature. Now, the seller is trying to back out and deny the sale ever happened. If we took this to civil court, would the receipts help us? Keep reading for the answer.
I'm unmarried, and we have no contact with the child's father or his family. Is it necessary to terminate his parental rights? Read more for the answer.
There is now a Senate version of the Hearing Protection Act of 2017, S. 59. Anyone who has ever watched Schoolhouse Rock understands this is an important step in the process. S. 59 currently has 7 cosponsors and has been sitting in the Finance Committee since its introduction. Second, the House version, H.R. 367, has gained 23 more cosponsors with a current total of 97 and has been referred to the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
In related news, Ronald B. Turk, associate deputy director and chief operating officer of the ATF, recently called for removing restrictions on the sale of gun silencers and for initiating a study on lifting the ban on imported assault weapons. Source.
Since the last post, The Hearing Protection Act of 2017, H.R. 367, has gained 6 additional cosponsors, bringing the total to 74. Text of H.R. 367 is available below. There is still no Senate version of the Bill.
The Hearing Protection Act is dead? Long live the Hearing Protection Act?
A new Hearing Protection Act has been introduced in the United States House of Representatives. 9 days after its introduction, H.R. 367 has 68 cosponsors and has been referred to the Judiciary and the Ways and Means committees. The purpose of H.R. 367 is "to provide that silencers be treated the same as long guns". Text of the H.R. 367 is not available at the time of this posting. There is no Senate version of the Bill.
The Hearing Protection act of 2015, H.R. 3799 of the 114th Congress, has 82 cosponsors and has been languishing in the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations since November 23 of 2015.
We will keep you updated.
Q: I lent a friend money because he was behind on his rent and needed help. Now, months later, he still hasn't paid me back, and he's cut off all communication and contact with me. I posted a demand letter on his front door and garage door which I know he received. It gave him 10 days to pay up or I would sue. Should I represent myself or hire an attorney? Keep reading for the answer.
Q: I paid for a car, and now I can't get the seller to sign the title and transfer ownership. What do I do?
Q: Not long after my girlfriend and I broke up she married another man, and they had a daughter. His name is on the birth certificate. Problem is my ex girlfriend was pregnant before the marriage, and based on the timing, I think I'm the father. What can I do to prove she's my daughter and get my parental rights? Keep reading for more.
Since the last update in August 2016, the House version of the bill has four new cosponsors, Harold Rogers of Kentucky, Rob Bishop of Utah, Evan H. Jenkins of West Virginia, and putting Nebraska on the map is Adrian Smith.
How does adding your spouse's name to the deed for your separate property affect the characterization of that property? Does putting your spouse's name on the deed make the property community property?
Since the last update in early June, there hasn't been much activity. The House version of the bill has two additional cosponsors, Steve Russell of Oklahoma and Mo Brooks of Alabama. This puts Oklahoma on the map and brings to 3 the number of cosponsors from Alabama. There is nothing to report on the Senate version of the bill.
Readers may recall from our first post on the Hearing Protection Act of 2015 that this bill would make it easier to purchase and possess "silencers" or suppressors. Although this proposed legislation appears to have some support in the House, it's unlikely this bill will ever become law.
NOT LEGAL ADVICE.
Nothing on this website is legal advice. The information on this site is general in nature and might not apply to your individual situation.