Commentary roundup: What editorial boards around the state are saying
Dallas Morning News
June 4 editorial, "Texas, close legal loophole that could compromise transparency in Uvalde."
Residents of Uvalde have good reason to question the credibility of law enforcement officials whose story has changed over and over. Police reports, bodycam footage and call recordings or transcripts can fill in some of their knowledge gaps.
But if police officials in Uvalde wish to delay giving answers, Texas law gives them an easy out. That’s because there’s a loophole in the state’s open records law dictating the release of records related to police investigations.
This provision of the Texas Public Information Act prohibits the disclosure of records related to an investigation that did not result in a conviction or deferred adjudication. This is known as the “dead suspect loophole.”
There were good intentions behind this language. The idea was to protect people who had been wrongly accused of crimes.
But what happens in practice is that police departments often block the release of records related to cases in which a person dies while in police custody or in an encounter with officers. Even the families of those who have died run into a wall trying to get records about their loved ones’ last moments, according to the reporting of KXAN-TV in Austin.
It’s too early to tell whether Uvalde police and other law enforcement agencies will be responsive to records requests or whether they will obfuscate. At any rate, the Texas Legislature should act to ensure transparency.
— The Dallas Morning News Editorial Board
Houston Chronicle
June 6 editorial, "Congress gave gun companies special protection in 2005. It should repeal it now."
When Ford Pintos kept exploding after their gas tanks were punctured, victims eventually sued. Ordinarily, in such a case, they would have been limited to actual damages, but a jury in 1981 awarded $125 million in punitive damages, shocking the industry. Why? Because the record uncovered at trial showed that Ford was fully aware of the likelihood of explosions but chose not to install the improvements necessary to prevent them. The company reasoned it would be cheaper to pay out occasional damages than install the new tanks — a few dollars a pop — in every car off the line.
That’s the power of tort litigation to uncover the true liability manufacturers might have when their products lead to deadly results. It’s also something the gun industry — whose products are under increasing scrutiny as mass shootings and gun violence tick upward — is largely protected against.
President Biden has made repealing the unusual protection and special treatment — granted by a 2005 law barring suits seeking to hold gunmakers liable when their products are used to commit crimes, including murder — a top priority. We think he’s right.
— Houston Chronicle Editorial Board
San Antonio Express-News
June 7 editorial, "Now is the time to rebuff NRA donations."
The mantra of “now is not the time” simply buys time for organizations such as the National Rifle Association to let the news cycle fade. Now is not the time seems to really mean there is never a good time.
In the aftermath of the school shooting in Uvalde — where an 18-year-old man used an assault-style rifle to kill 19 children and two teachers — the Houston Chronicle overlayed Texas politicians’ comments about the tragedy with the amount of money they’ve accepted from the NRA.
U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, $583,816. U.S. Rep. Pete Sessions, $204,705. U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, $176,284.U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar, $31,669. Gov. Greg Abbott, $16,750. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, $12,500. U.S. Rep. Chip Roy $11,763. Indicted Attorney General Ken Paxton, $10,750. U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, $9,759.
Perhaps now should be the time for candidates and elected officials to reject funds from the NRA and give serious consideration to the gun safety reforms that polls show most Americans support. Even under the best of circumstances, NRA donations to Cornyn, for example, color his involvement with potential bipartisan federal reforms.
To be clear, any bipartisan agreement about gun safety measures in the aftermath of Uvalde should include key stakeholders such as the NRA and other gun rights supporters. But it also requires an honest discussion about easy access to firearms — and we don’t see that happening.
— San Antonio Express-News Editorial Board
New Braunfels Herald-Zeitung
June 8 editorial, "NBISD residents deserve more answers"
The news that there would be no criminal charges for anyone involved in the trashing of New Braunfels High School that reportedly started as a senior prank and spiraled into something more destructive has more than a few people grinding their teeth.
In the minds of many — and the law — a high school senior is an adult. Had they assaulted someone, stolen a car, or broken any other law, they would have been held accountable by the criminal justice system.
The fact that the district chose to handle it in-house according to its own disciplinary procedures creates a scenario in which only those who are punished — and their families — know who was held to account for the destruction.
That's not a satisfying outcome for others in the district who don't know that anyone was actually held accountable — beyond the district saying some were.
— The New Braunfels Herald-Zeitung Editorial Board
This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Austin American-Statesman Commentary Roundup: June 12, 2022
