Lawmaking & Custody Enforcement – Episode 25

In Episode 25 of Cases & Cocktails, Bryan and Janice Eggleston step outside the courtroom and into the Texas Capitol to share their experience testifying before a Senate committee in support of a bill addressing custodial interference.

To complement the high-stakes conversation, the couple sips a Coconut Tequila Cooler—made with Ocho tequila, coconut water, lime juice, and agave. While the drink is refreshing, the topic is anything but light.

A Lawyer’s Perspective on the Legislative Process

For the first time, the Egglestons were invited to testify as expert witnesses on a family-law-related bill—one seeking to revise the Texas Penal Code’s treatment of possession interference. They were among the first to speak at the Senate committee hearing, offering testimony in support of a proposal that would hold both parents accountable when one denies the other their court-ordered parenting time.

What stood out most? The formality, the brevity (each speaker was limited to two minutes), and the genuine attentiveness of the senators. Even seasoned litigators like Bryan and Janice found the experience both exciting and nerve-wracking. But more than that, it revealed just how misunderstood basic custody terms are—even among lawmakers.

Understanding the Proposed Bill: A “Three Strikes” Model for Custodial Interference

Currently, the Texas Penal Code allows for criminal charges only when the noncustodial parent violates visitation terms. The new bill—authored by Robert Garza and sponsored by Senator Angela Paxton—removes the outdated “custodial” and “noncustodial” designations and applies equally to either parent.

Here’s how the amendment would work:

✅ First Offense – A Class C misdemeanor citation (a simple ticket)
 ✅ Second Offense – Another citation
 ✅ Third Offense – A state jail felony

This model allows law enforcement to respond immediately when a parent denies visitation. It removes the burden from the other parent to initiate costly and time-consuming enforcement litigation, while also giving repeat violations serious consequences.

As Janice explains, “It’s about giving officers the tools they need to act in the moment—before things escalate into more serious family disruptions.”

Challenging Dangerous Assumptions in Family Law

During their visit to the Capitol, the Egglestons witnessed a heated exchange on the Senate floor where one senator openly opposed the bill. Her reasoning? That the custodial parent is the “better” parent and should be trusted to override the court’s orders.

Bryan and Janice found this perspective not only incorrect—but dangerous.

The labels “custodial” and “noncustodial” are administrative and often rooted in child support designations. They do not reflect parenting quality, nor do they define legal rights. As the Egglestons emphasize in the episode, family law is based on orders, not titles. If a parent believes a court order is no longer appropriate, the solution is to seek a legal modification—not to violate the order on personal judgment.

Final Thoughts

This episode offers a behind-the-scenes look at how laws are made—and why family law practitioners need to stay involved beyond the courtroom. The bill in question passed the Texas Senate and is now on its way to the House.

For families caught in the painful loop of denied visitation, this proposed legislation offers hope for a more practical, enforceable solution. And for legal professionals, it serves as a reminder that education and advocacy are just as important outside the courtroom as in it.