Outlet reports judge strikes down Texas law restricting some public drag performances, citing First Amendment

A federal judge has reportedly struck down, for the second time, a Texas law that would have restricted some public drag performances in the state, according to a report Tuesday from The Hill. The case is centered on Texas Senate Bill 12, a measure the outlet describes as having been passed in 2023, and U.S. District Judge David Hittner as the presiding judge.

The Hill reported that Judge Hittner found the statute unconstitutional under the First Amendment and characterized it as an impermissible restriction on free speech. The reporting also frames the ruling as a repeat challenge, indicating the law has already been litigated once before, though the article does not provide the earlier procedural history in the portion available here.

The reported decision involved the federal constitutional question of what speech-related limits the state may impose on public performances. Under the outlet’s account, the judge’s reasoning rested on the First Amendment protections for expressive conduct, with the ruling targeting limits on public drag performances.

The practical effect of a federal district court decision like the one described would be to prevent enforcement of the invalidated state restrictions while the case remains subject to further judicial review. The extent of that effect, including whether the decision applies statewide and whether the state seeks appellate review, would depend on the specifics of the order.

Because the underlying court order and related docket documents are not included in the materials provided here, Apex Times cannot confirm the exact language of the ruling, the precise named parties in the caption, the effective date stated in the order, or whether an appeal has been filed or is imminent.

If the state pursues appellate review, the next steps would be determined by the appellate timetable and any requests for a stay of the district court’s order. Until additional official court documents are reviewed, the record described above remains based on the outlet’s reporting.