Texas SB 38 Eviction Guide: How the 2026 'Rocket Docket' Speeds Up Squatter Removal

Executive Summary

The Texas rental housing market stands on the precipice of a generational shift in legal procedure. Effective January 1, 2026, Senate Bill 38 (SB 38) will fundamentally restructure the mechanism by which property owners recover possession of their real estate. Born from a legislative session dominated by headlines of "squatter crises" and property rights disputes, SB 38—often paired in discourse with its law-enforcement-focused companion, Senate Bill 1333—introduces what legal scholars and practitioners have dubbed the "Rocket Docket".

This report offers an exhaustive analysis of SB 38, designed to be accessible to a general audience (comparable to a 10th-grade reading level) while maintaining the rigorous depth required by legal professionals and property stakeholders. It explores the bifurcation of the eviction process: the traditional path for legitimate tenants, which has been tightened and modernized, and the new expedited "summary disposition" track for unauthorized occupants.

We will dissect the statutory changes to Chapter 24 of the Texas Property Code, analyze the socio-economic implications of the new 21-day trial mandate, and provide a comparative assessment of the civil remedies in SB 38 versus the criminal enforcement powers granted by SB 1333. This document serves as a definitive guide to understanding the future of property rights and tenant protections in Texas.

Part I: The Genesis of the 2026 Reforms

1.1 The "Squatter Crisis" Narrative

To understand the necessity of Senate Bill 38, one must first understand the climate of the 89th Texas Legislative Session. Throughout 2024 and 2025, a narrative emerged regarding a "squatting crisis" in Texas. Public testimony provided to the Senate Committee on State Affairs highlighted numerous instances where property owners found their homes occupied by strangers—individuals with no lease, no title, and no permission to be there.

Under the pre-2026 legal framework, these "squatters" were often afforded the same procedural due process protections as legitimate tenants. When police were called to these scenes, they frequently deemed the disputes "civil matters," directing homeowners to the Justice of the Peace (JP) courts. This initiated a weeks-long, sometimes months-long, eviction process during which the unauthorized occupant could remain in the home rent-free, often causing significant property damage.

Governor Greg Abbott and key legislative authors, including Senator Paul Bettencourt (R-Houston), argued that this system conflated two distinct categories of people:

1. Tenants: Individuals who entered a property with legal permission (a lease) but subsequently violated the agreement (e.g., non-payment of rent).

2. Unauthorized Occupants (Squatters): Individuals who entered or remained on a property without any legal right or prior agreement.

SB 38 was drafted to disentangle these groups, creating a streamlined process to handle the latter without stripping due process from the former.

1.2 The Legislative Intent and Passage

The journey of SB 38 was not without controversy. Early drafts of the bill were criticized by housing advocates, such as Texas Housers and BASTA (Building and Strengthening Tenant Action), for potentially eroding the rights of low-income renters. Critics labeled the initial versions as "anti-tenant," citing provisions that would have allowed for lightning-fast evictions with minimal notice, potentially leaving legitimate renters homeless due to clerical errors or aggressive landlord tactics.

However, through a collaborative legislative process, significant amendments were made. The "poison pills"—such as provisions that would have defunded legal aid or allowed landlords to "shop" for favorable judges—were removed. The final version of the bill, signed by Governor Abbott on June 20, 2025, represents a bipartisan compromise: it strengthens property rights against true squatters while preserving, and in some cases clarifying, protections for tenants.

1.3 The "Rocket Docket" Concept

The term "Rocket Docket" is colloquial legal terminology referring to a court schedule designed to fast-track cases to resolution. In the context of SB 38, it specifically refers to the newly established timelines and the "summary disposition" mechanism that allows judges to bypass full trials when the facts are undisputed.

The intent is to unclog the Justice Courts. By removing clear-cut cases of unauthorized occupancy from the general docket, the courts can theoretically process legitimate landlord-tenant disputes more efficiently. The "Rocket Docket" ensures that a homeowner does not have to wait two months to remove a stranger who broke in through the back window.

Part II: Senate Bill 38 – The "Judicial Solution"

Senate Bill 38 is primarily a procedural overhaul of Chapter 24 of the Texas Property Code. It dictates how lawsuits for eviction (forcible entry and detainer) are handled in Justice Courts. Unlike its companion bill SB 1333, which involves police action, SB 38 is strictly a civil court process.

2.1 The Core Mechanism: Summary Disposition

The most revolutionary addition to Texas eviction law is Section 24.005106, which introduces Summary Disposition to eviction suits.

What is Summary Disposition?

In standard civil litigation, a summary judgment allows a judge to decide a case without a trial if one party can show there are "no genuinely disputed facts." SB 38 adapts this for eviction court.

• The Filing: When a landlord files a sworn petition for eviction, they can simultaneously file a "Motion for Summary Disposition."

• The Allegation: This motion argues that the occupant has no legal right to the property—no lease, no title, and no permission.

• The Standard: The landlord must prove that the facts are so clear that a trial would be a waste of the court's time.

The Procedure

1. Citation Notice: When the constable serves the eviction papers, the citation must prominently state that a summary disposition has been requested.

2. The 4-Day Window: The occupant has exactly four days to respond to the motion.

3. The Burden of Proof: If the occupant fails to respond or fails to provide evidence (like a lease or rent receipt) that creates a genuine dispute, the judge can grant the eviction immediately, without holding a trial.

Insight: This shifts the dynamic significantly. Previously, the burden was entirely on the landlord to prove their case at a trial. Now, in squatter cases, the burden shifts quickly to the occupant to justify their presence. If they remain silent, they lose.

2.2 The 21-Day Trial Mandate

One of the major complaints from property owners was the inconsistency of court scheduling. In some busy precincts, trials might be set weeks or months out. SB 38 standardizes this statewide.

• Statutory Deadline: The Justice Court must hold a trial (if one is required) not less than 10 days and not more than 21 days after the petition is filed.

• No Delays: The law explicitly limits the ability of judges to postpone trials. A trial cannot be postponed for more than seven days unless both parties agree in writing.

Implication: This creates a hard cap on how long an eviction suit can remain in limbo. Every Justice Court in Texas, from rural counties to urban centers like Harris and Dallas Counties, must adhere to this "Rocket Docket" schedule.

2.3 Service of Citation Reforms

Speed in the courtroom matters little if the papers are never served. SB 38 tightens the rules for service of process.

• The 5-Day Rule: Sheriffs and constables are now required to make a "diligent effort" to serve the citation within five business days of filing.

• Alternative Service: If the constable fails to serve the papers within this window, the landlord is explicitly authorized to use a private process server or an off-duty law enforcement officer to serve the papers.

This provision addresses a common bottleneck where understaffed constable offices could delay service for weeks. By privatizing the option after five days, the law ensures the clock keeps ticking.

2.4 Modernizing Notice Delivery

The law finally catches up to the digital age regarding the "Notice to Vacate" (the first step before filing a lawsuit).

• Electronic Delivery: Landlords may now deliver notices via email or other electronic means, provided the tenant has agreed to this method in writing (typically in the lease agreement).

• Why This Matters: Squatters or evading tenants often hide behind locked gates or refuse to answer the door to avoid physical delivery. Electronic delivery ensures that notice is considered "given" as soon as it is sent, closing a major loophole for evasion.

Part III: Senate Bill 1333 – The "Enforcement Solution"

While SB 38 fixes the courts, Senate Bill 1333 (SB 1333) fixes the immediate crisis on the ground. It is critical to distinguish between these two bills, as they offer different remedies for different situations.

3.1 The Sheriff's Authority

SB 1333 empowers law enforcement to bypass the civil court system entirely in clear-cut cases of criminal trespass disguised as residency.

• Sworn Complaint: A property owner can file a "sworn complaint" directly with the sheriff or constable, alleging that a person is unlawfully occupying a residence.

• Criteria for Removal: The property must not have been open to the public, and the occupant must not be a current or former tenant.

• Immediate Action: If the sheriff verifies these facts (e.g., checking for a lease), they can remove the squatter immediately.

3.2 Criminal Penalties

SB 1333 also increases the stakes for squatters. It enhances criminal penalties for:

• Criminal Mischief: Damaging the property while trespassing.

• Fraud: Engaging in a real estate transaction (like trying to lease the home to someone else) without legal authority.

This criminalization is a deterrent. Under the old system, squatting was low-risk; the worst outcome was an eventual civil eviction. Now, it carries the threat of arrest and a criminal record.

Part IV: Comparative Analysis – SB 38 vs. SB 1333

To assist property owners and tenants in understanding which law applies to their situation, the following table contrasts the two distinct pathways created by the 89th Legislature.

Strategic Insight: SB 1333 is the "emergency room" for immediate triage of strangers breaking into homes. SB 38 is the "surgery" for removing occupants who claim some right to be there (e.g., a fake lease, a verbal agreement) that a sheriff cannot adjudicate on the sidewalk. If a sheriff declines to act under SB 1333 because the situation is "too complicated," the owner utilizes SB 38.

Part V: Procedural Guide for the New Era

The implementation of SB 38 requires landlords, property managers, and tenants to adjust their workflows. The "business as usual" approach to eviction is no longer compliant or strategic.

5.1 Step-by-Step Eviction Process (Post-2026)

Step 1: The Pre-Suit Notice

• Tenant Situation: If a tenant who has never been late before misses rent, the landlord must now send a "Notice to Pay Rent or Vacate". This effectively codifies a "right to cure" (a chance to pay) that did not explicitly exist in state statutes previously.

• Squatter Situation: An immediate "Notice to Vacate" can be given.

• Delivery: Check the lease. If authorized, send via email and certified mail to ensure redundancy.

Step 2: Filing the Petition

• Venue: File in the Justice Court precinct where the property is located.

• The Forms: Use the updated petition forms (mandatory updates by Jan 1, 2026) that include the new sworn statements required by SB 38.

• The Motion: For unauthorized occupants, file the Motion for Summary Disposition immediately with the petition. Do not wait.

Step 3: Service and Response

• Monitor the Constable: Property managers must track the 5-day service window. If the constable is slow, immediately hire a private server.

• The 4-Day Countdown: Once served, the clock starts for the summary disposition. If the occupant does not file a response within 4 days, the landlord's attorney should move for immediate judgment.

Step 4: The Hearing (If Necessary)

• The 21-Day Limit: Be prepared for trial quickly. The old tactic of "delaying for discovery" is largely eliminated.

• Remote Appearance: SB 38 codifies the ability to hold hearings via video conference (e.g., Zoom) if both parties agree, streamlining the logistics.

Step 5: The Appeal (The "Good Faith" Hurdle)

• Stopping the Stall: If the tenant appeals a non-payment judgment, they must pay one month's rent into the court registry within 5 days.

• Consequence: If they fail to pay, the landlord can request a Writ of Possession immediately, even while the appeal is technically pending in the higher court. This prevents tenants from living rent-free during the appeal process.

Part VI: Impact on Stakeholders

The "Rocket Docket" is a double-edged sword, sharpening efficiency for some while cutting into the defense time for others.

6.1 Impact on Landlords

For property owners, SB 38 is a massive victory for risk mitigation.

• Financial Stability: By reducing the eviction timeline from potential months to a standardized ~30 days (including notice and writ execution), the financial loss from a bad tenant or squatter is capped.

• Insurance and Valuation: Lower risk of prolonged occupancy can lead to better insurance rates and higher property valuations, as the asset is viewed as more liquid and secure.

• Clarity: The removal of local "patchwork" rules prevents cities (like Austin or Dallas) from creating their own eviction hurdles that contradict state law, providing a uniform business environment.

6.2 Impact on Tenants

For legitimate tenants, the landscape is more complex.

• The "Right to Cure" Win: The requirement for a "Notice to Pay Rent or Vacate" for first-time delinquencies is a significant protection. It prevents a landlord from evicting a good tenant over a single accidental missed payment without warning.

• The Speed Risk: However, the 21-day trial limit puts immense pressure on tenants who do have a valid defense (e.g., habitability issues). Finding a lawyer, gathering evidence, and preparing a case in less than three weeks is a tall order for working-class families.

• Electronic Notice Pitfalls: Tenants who struggle with technology or lack consistent internet access face the risk of missing an emailed notice, leading to a default judgment against them before they even know they are being sued.

6.3 Impact on the Courts

• Efficiency vs. Workload: While the "Rocket Docket" is intended to clear cases, the strict deadlines may initially overwhelm court clerks. Tracking the 5-day service window and the 21-day trial window for thousands of cases will require robust case management software updates.

• Standardization: The law forces a standardization of forms and procedures, reducing the "JP Shopping" where landlords would file in specific precincts known for faster processing.

Part VII: Economic and Societal Implications

The passage of SB 38 reflects a broader economic philosophy centered on the protection of private property as a cornerstone of the housing market.

7.1 The Economics of Rent

Proponents argue that the "squatter tax"—the cost landlords pass on to all tenants to cover the losses from non-paying occupants—will decrease. If eviction is efficient, landlords may be less draconian in their screening requirements (e.g., credit scores), knowing they have a swift remedy if things go wrong. This could theoretically increase housing access.

7.2 The Displacement Concern

Conversely, critics argue that "efficiency" in eviction simply means "faster homelessness." By removing the friction in the system, Texas may see a spike in displacement figures. The "Rocket Docket" does not solve the underlying issue of housing affordability; it merely accelerates the consequences of poverty.

Part VIII: Practical Scenarios (Case Studies)

To better understand the application of SB 38 and SB 1333, let us examine two hypothetical scenarios based on common real-world situations.

Scenario A: The Vacation Home Nightmare

• Situation: A homeowner in Galveston returns to their vacation rental to find a family living there who claims they "rented it from a guy on Craigslist." They have a crude, handwritten lease.

• Old Law (Pre-2026): Police call it a "civil matter." The owner files for eviction. The occupants delay, appeal, and stay for 3 months.

• New Law (SB 38/SB 1333):

  • Step 1: The owner files a sworn complaint with the Sheriff (SB 1333).

  • Step 2: The Sheriff reviews the "lease." If it is obviously fraudulent, they may remove the occupants immediately.

  • Step 3: If the Sheriff is unsure, the owner files in Justice Court with a Motion for Summary Disposition (SB 38).

  • Outcome: The judge sees the lease is fake. The occupants fail to respond with valid proof within 4 days. Judgment is granted. The property is recovered in roughly 2-3 weeks, not months.

Scenario B: The Struggling Tenant

• Situation: A single mother in Houston loses her job and misses rent for the first time.

• Old Law: The landlord could post a 3-day Notice to Vacate immediately and file suit.

• New Law (SB 38):

  • Step 1: The landlord must send a "Notice to Pay Rent or Vacate" because she has no prior history of delinquency.

  • Step 2: She is given a chance to pay. She borrows money and pays within the notice period.

  • Outcome: Eviction is avoided entirely. The "Right to Cure" provision saves the tenancy.

Part IX: Conclusion

Texas Senate Bill 38 represents a paradigm shift in the balance of power between property owners and occupants. By creating a "Rocket Docket" for clear-cut cases of unauthorized occupancy, the state has effectively closed the procedural loop-holes that allowed squatting to become a viable strategy for free housing. The law acknowledges that time is money, and in the world of real estate, 90-day delays are unsustainable.

However, the "10th class student" must understand that this efficiency comes with responsibility. For landlords, the responsibility is to follow the new, stricter procedural rules (like the Notice to Pay Rent). For tenants, the responsibility is to be vigilant—to check email for notices, to pay rent into the registry during appeals, and to act swiftly if legal action is taken.

As January 1, 2026 approaches, the Texas housing market prepares for a faster, stricter, and more digitized future. Whether this leads to a healthier rental market or a more volatile one remains the ultimate question the "Rocket Docket" will answer.

Disclaimer: This report is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. The laws discussed (SB 38, SB 1333) are subject to judicial interpretation and may change. Property owners and tenants should consult with a qualified attorney in their jurisdiction for specific legal guidance.