Relating to certain prohibited transactions and logistical support between a governmental entity and an abortion assistance entity or abortion provider for the procurement of an abortion or related services.
SB 33 amends Texas Government Code Chapter 2273 to expand and clarify restrictions on how governmental entities may use taxpayer resources in connection with abortion-related services. The bill broadens the definition of an “abortion assistance entity” to include persons or organizations that provide money, travel, lodging, child care, counseling, abortion doula services, or abortion-inducing drugs to help someone obtain an abortion. It also revises the definition of “abortion provider” to mean a person who performs or induces an abortion.
The bill prohibits governmental entities from entering into taxpayer resource transactions with abortion providers, their affiliates, or abortion assistance entities for the purpose of providing an abortion or abortion assistance. It further bars governmental entities from appropriating or spending money on logistical support for the express purpose of helping a woman procure an abortion, including child care, transportation, lodging, food, counseling that encourages abortion, and other facilitating services. The attorney general is authorized to sue to stop prohibited transactions or expenditures, obtain declaratory and injunctive relief, recover costs and attorney’s fees, and the bill waives governmental immunity to the extent of that liability. The act takes effect September 1, 2025.
SB 33 would significantly expand state-law limits on local and other governmental entities’ ability to contract with, fund, or otherwise support abortion-related organizations and services. It adds new statutory definitions and a new prohibition on public spending for logistical support tied to abortion access, while strengthening enforcement through attorney general litigation and immunity waivers. The bill affects Chapter 2273 of the Government Code and could reach a broad range of public funding arrangements, grants, contracts, and service programs involving abortion-related assistance.
The bill appears to have been supported by a majority in both chambers but with notable partisan division. It passed the Senate 22-9 and the House 87-58, with the Senate later concurring in House amendments by the same 22-9 margin. The vote pattern suggests strong support among proponents of abortion restrictions and substantial opposition from lawmakers concerned about the breadth of the prohibitions.
The main point of contention is the bill’s broad definition of “abortion assistance entity” and its inclusion of indirect support such as travel, lodging, child care, counseling, and abortion doula services, which opponents may view as sweeping beyond direct abortion provision. Another likely dispute is the prohibition on public spending for logistical support and the attorney general’s enforcement authority, including the waiver of governmental immunity and limits on fee-shifting protections. Supporters likely frame the bill as preventing public funds from facilitating abortions, while opponents likely argue it restricts local government discretion and reaches services that are not themselves abortions.