SAN ANTONIO, Texas — The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has lifted a lower court injunction and allowed Texas’ Senate Bill 12 to take effect, clearing the way for enforcement of new restrictions on certain drag performances in venues where minors are present. The ruling reverses a federal district court’s earlier order that had blocked the law, concluding that Texas may regulate performances deemed “sexually oriented” when accessible to children.

The appellate decision represents a significant legal victory for state officials, including Attorney General Ken Paxton, who defended the statute as a child-protection measure. Opponents, including performers and civil liberties groups, argue the law infringes on constitutionally protected expression and disproportionately targets drag performers.

At the center of the legal fight is not merely drag as an art form, but how Texas defines “sexually oriented conduct” — a term embedded in existing state penal law and incorporated into SB 12.

What SB 12 Does

Senate Bill 12 amends Texas law to prohibit certain performances on public property or in the presence of minors if the performances include “sexual conduct,” as defined by state statute. The law does not use the word “drag” in its operative prohibitions. Instead, it applies to performances that appeal to the prurient interest in sex and involve specific forms of sexualized conduct.

Under the statute, a person commits an offense if they engage in a sexually oriented performance on public property or in the presence of an individual younger than 18 years of age. The law classifies violations as a Class A misdemeanor, with enhanced penalties for repeat offenders.

Supporters argue the statute mirrors longstanding restrictions on sexually explicit performances involving minors. Critics contend it was drafted in response to drag events and creates uncertainty for performers who do not engage in explicit conduct.

The Legal Definition of “Sexually Oriented”

Texas does not rely on a vague or novel definition. Instead, SB 12 draws from the Texas Penal Code’s existing terminology.

Under Texas law, “sexual conduct” includes:

• Sexual intercourse;
• Deviate sexual intercourse;
• Sexual contact; and
• The exhibition of the genitals, anus, or female breast below the top of the areola.

“Sexual contact” is further defined as any touching of the anus, breast, or genitals of another person with intent to arouse or gratify sexual desire.

Additionally, “deviate sexual intercourse” includes contact between the genitals of one person and the mouth or anus of another, or penetration of the genitals or anus with an object.

The statute’s application hinges not on costume or identity, but on whether a performance includes conduct that meets these statutory definitions and is intended to appeal to prurient interests.

In court filings, state attorneys emphasized that the law regulates sexually explicit conduct — not viewpoint or identity — and parallels restrictions already applied to strip clubs and adult cabarets.

The Fifth Circuit’s Reasoning

The Fifth Circuit panel concluded that the district court erred in issuing a sweeping injunction blocking the law before it could take effect. The appellate judges found that Texas demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of its argument that the statute regulates conduct, not protected speech.

The court emphasized the state’s “compelling interest” in shielding minors from exposure to sexualized performances, particularly on public property.

While the panel did not issue a final ruling on every constitutional question raised, it determined that the lower court’s injunction was too broad at this preliminary stage.

The earlier district court ruling had found portions of the law unconstitutionally vague, suggesting performers might self-censor out of fear that ordinary drag performances could be prosecuted. The appellate panel, however, concluded that the statutory definitions were sufficiently grounded in established penal law.

The Plaintiffs’ Arguments

The lawsuit challenging SB 12 was filed by performers and advocacy organizations, including the ACLU of Texas. Plaintiffs argued the statute violates the First Amendment by targeting expressive conduct based on content.

They contended that drag is a form of theatrical and political expression protected under the Constitution, and that the law chills speech by creating ambiguity around what constitutes a violation.

In earlier hearings, plaintiffs asserted that drag brunches, Pride events, and theatrical performances could be swept into the law’s scope even if they contained no explicit sexual activity.

The Fifth Circuit did not definitively resolve those broader First Amendment questions but concluded that the challengers had not met the threshold to justify blocking enforcement statewide.

Paxton’s Response

Attorney General Ken Paxton hailed the ruling as validation of Texas’ authority.

In a statement following the decision, Paxton said the court affirmed Texas’ right to protect children from “sexually explicit performances.” His office argued throughout the litigation that the statute mirrors restrictions long upheld by courts when applied to adult entertainment establishments.

Paxton’s office has been active in defending a series of social policy measures in federal court, often before the Fifth Circuit, which has become a focal point for constitutional litigation involving Texas law.

What Happens Next

The law is now set to take effect in March 2026 unless further judicial intervention occurs. Plaintiffs may seek rehearing before the full Fifth Circuit or petition the U.S. Supreme Court for review.

In the meantime, venue owners and performers must evaluate their programming in light of the statutory language. Legal analysts note that enforcement will likely hinge on factual determinations about the content of specific performances.

For prosecutors, the burden will be to demonstrate that a performance involved conduct meeting the precise statutory definitions — not merely gender expression, theatrical exaggeration, or cross-dressing.

COLONY RIDGE, TX – In a $68 million settlement announced by the U.S. Department of Justice, Colony Ridge Land LLC and its affiliated entities agreed to resolve allegations that the developer engaged in predatory land sales and lending practices targeting Hispanic borrowers. The agreement, reached in coordination with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office, concludes litigation initiated in late 2023 and expanded through early 2024.

According to the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, the lawsuit accused Colony Ridge of violating the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Fair Housing Act through marketing and lending tactics that allegedly steered vulnerable buyers into high risk seller financed loans without verifying their ability to repay. Investigators said the result was a pattern of defaults, foreclosures, and financial distress across the rapidly expanding Liberty County development.

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon stated the government viewed the conduct as both unlawful and socially harmful, asserting that deceptive lending schemes undermine civil rights protections while destabilizing communities. Dhillon also noted enforcement efforts would extend to lenders and developers whose practices may contribute to illegal immigration or unsafe housing conditions.

The settlement resolves a December 2023 federal lawsuit filed jointly by the Justice Department and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, alongside a March 2024 lawsuit brought by the Texas Attorney General’s Office.

Under the terms of the agreement, Colony Ridge must allocate $48 million toward infrastructure upgrades, including $18 million dedicated to drainage improvements intended to mitigate flooding risks that residents and investigators say have caused costly property damage. An additional $30 million will fund broader infrastructure enhancements throughout the development.

The developer also agreed to adopt underwriting standards requiring verification of borrower income, assets, and debt levels before issuing loans, a shift designed to reduce default risk. The settlement further mandates foreclosure mitigation policies, borrower assistance programs, and a credit remediation plan addressing past reporting tied to defaulted loans.

Investigators also cited concerns involving marketing practices. As part of the settlement, Colony Ridge must ensure advertising accurately represents property conditions, utility access, and loan terms. Pre sale disclosures must now clearly indicate whether homes are move in ready and whether essential services are immediately available.

A legal settlement involving the State of Texas, the federal government, and Colony Ridge will also require prospective buyers to verify lawful presence in the United States. According to reporting from Yahoo News, purchasers must present a valid Texas-issued identification card or driver’s license, or appropriate immigration documentation such as a passport accompanied by a current visa, before completing certain transactions.

Another significant provision includes a $20 million commitment aimed at strengthening law enforcement presence within the development. The agreement requires Colony Ridge to coordinate with local, state, and federal authorities to enhance public safety efforts as the community continues to grow.

Additionally, the settlement imposes documentation requirements tied to federal land sales exemptions and halts new residential plats for direct to consumer sales for three years, effectively slowing the rapid expansion that drew national scrutiny.

Colony Ridge has not admitted wrongdoing as part of the settlement, a common feature in civil resolutions. The company has previously stated that it provides affordable homeownership opportunities to buyers who may struggle to access traditional financing, while emphasizing its cooperation with regulators.

The development has been the subject of intense political and media attention due to its size, unconventional financing model, infrastructure concerns, and questions surrounding population growth patterns in the region.

Sources: U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division announcement, Justice.gov; Texas Office of the Attorney General filings; Consumer Financial Protection Bureau case records.

MEXICO CITY, Mexico — Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes, the elusive and brutal cartel boss known as “El Mencho,” was killed Sunday in a targeted security operation in the mountains of Jalisco, an operation Mexican officials say was supported by U.S. intelligence assets. Within hours of confirmation of his death, widespread violence erupted across western Mexico, prompting U.S. authorities to issue urgent shelter-in-place warnings for American citizens.

El Mencho led the powerful Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG), one of the most violent and sophisticated drug trafficking organizations operating in North America. His killing marks one of the most significant blows to organized crime in Mexico in more than a decade. But it has also triggered immediate instability in key strongholds, including Guadalajara and Puerto Vallarta, where roadblocks, arson, and armed clashes have disrupted daily life and air travel.

U.S. Intelligence Role Confirmed

According to statements released by the White House press office, the United States provided intelligence support to the Mexican government in advance of the operation carried out in Talpa de Allende, Jalisco. The targeted strike resulted not only in El Mencho’s death, but also in the killing of three additional cartel members. Three others were wounded and two were taken into custody.

Administration officials described El Mencho as one of the top traffickers of fentanyl into the United States and a priority target for both governments. Last year, President Donald Trump formally designated the CJNG as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, a move intended to expand prosecutorial and financial tools available to U.S. authorities combating transnational criminal networks.

In a public statement, the administration emphasized that the United States would continue working with Mexican counterparts to dismantle narcotics trafficking organizations responsible for the flow of fentanyl and other synthetic opioids into American communities. Officials also commended the Mexican military for what they described as a coordinated and successful operation.

While U.S. personnel were not reported to have directly participated in ground combat, the confirmation of intelligence-sharing underscores the deepening operational collaboration between Washington and Mexico City in confronting cartel leadership.

Immediate Fallout: Roadblocks, Arson, Flight Cancellations

Within hours of reports that El Mencho had been killed, armed groups erected roadblocks using burning vehicles along highways in Jalisco. Social media footage verified by local outlets showed heavy gunfire in several municipalities long associated with CJNG dominance.

Commercial aviation was disrupted across the region. Although no airports were formally closed, road access to terminals was cut off in multiple locations. U.S. officials reported that most domestic and international flights in Guadalajara and Puerto Vallarta were canceled due to security concerns. Ride-sharing services in Puerto Vallarta were suspended entirely.

Local residents described a night punctuated by explosions and sustained gunfire. One resident in Guadalajara, who requested anonymity for safety reasons, said, “We heard shooting for hours. Nobody knew if it was the military or cartel members. People stayed inside.”

Mexican federal authorities have deployed additional troops to stabilize affected zones. As of Monday evening, casualty figures from the unrest remained unclear.

State Department Issues Shelter-in-Place Alert

The U.S. State Department issued an updated security alert warning American citizens in several parts of Mexico to shelter in place due to “ongoing security operations and related road blockages and criminal activity.”

The advisory stated that U.S. government personnel in impacted areas were also sheltering in place and would continue doing so while conditions remained volatile. Americans were urged to minimize unnecessary movement, monitor local media, and check federal highway authorities for road closures, as toll roads in multiple areas were temporarily suspended.

In addition, the department advised citizens to maintain communication with family members regarding their location and well-being.

Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs Mora Namdar emphasized that the safety and security of U.S. citizens remains the administration’s highest priority. She encouraged Americans in Mexico to enroll in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) to receive real-time security updates and follow official travel advisories.

The U.S. Embassy in Mexico City published a detailed list of impacted areas and operational changes affecting transportation infrastructure.

Risk of Power Vacuum

Historical precedent offers cautionary lessons.

When Joaquín Guzmán, known as “El Chapo,” was captured and later extradited to the United States, factions within the Sinaloa Cartel fractured, leading to internal conflict and regional instability. Experts note that CJNG, while heavily centralized around Oseguera Cervantes’ leadership, maintains regional commanders who may compete for dominance.

“The immediate question is succession,” said a Mexico-based security consultant who requested anonymity due to the sensitivity of the situation. “If a clear heir emerges quickly, violence may subside. If not, fragmentation could produce months of instability.”

The Jalisco region occupies a strategic nexus for drug transit routes, port access, and financial operations. Prolonged instability there could reverberate nationally.

Broader Strategic Implications

The confirmed intelligence cooperation between the United States and Mexico may signal a new phase in bilateral security coordination. For years, the two governments have navigated a delicate balance between sovereignty concerns and shared security objectives.

The Foreign Terrorist Organization designation for CJNG carries significant legal implications. It enables enhanced financial sanctions, material support prosecutions, and expanded investigative authorities under U.S. law. Critics of the designation have warned it could complicate diplomatic engagement, while supporters argue it reflects the scale and brutality of cartel operations.

For American citizens currently in Mexico, the immediate concern remains personal safety. The State Department has reiterated longstanding travel advisories for several Mexican states, particularly those with sustained cartel presence.

As of this writing, Mexican federal officials have not released comprehensive operational details surrounding the strike that killed Oseguera Cervantes, citing ongoing investigations.