Plaintiffs Requested Dismissal of Texas Protest Lawsuit

Three women moved to drop their legal challenge against the state after receiving one-year bans from the Capitol.

Updated on Oct. 13, 2026 in Law

Bold flat-color editorial illustration of a classical capitol dome, evoking the institutional authority of Texas state government proceedings. — Three plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their lawsuit against the Texas State Preservation Board after their one-year protest bans expired in October. AI Illustration. Upload story photo >

Live Poll

Should government authorities be allowed to ban individuals from state capitol grounds for protesting?

Three plaintiffs have filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss their lawsuit against the Texas State Preservation Board. The motion follows the expiration of one-year bans issued by state troopers during a 2025 redistricting protest.

Why it matters

The lawsuit challenged the constitutionality of bans issued by the Texas Department of Public Safety. The state had previously moved to dismiss the case on the grounds that the now-expired bans rendered the legal dispute moot.

The legal action involved 3 plaintiffs who were issued one-year bans by the Texas Department of Public Safety. The state moved to dismiss the case in September 2026 after those bans reached their expiration date.

The players

Jessica Cohen

She is one of the three plaintiffs who brought the lawsuit against the Texas State Preservation Board.

Jill Van Voorhis

She is a named plaintiff in the lawsuit challenging state-issued bans at the Texas State Capitol.

Angel Carroll

She is a plaintiff involved in the legal challenge concerning redistricting protest restrictions.

Texas Attorney General's Office

This state agency represents the government in legal proceedings and moved to dismiss the case as moot.

Texas Department of Public Safety

This state law enforcement agency issued the one-year bans to the plaintiffs following a protest.

The details

The plaintiffs, including Jessica Cohen, Jill Van Voorhis, and Angel Carroll, filed their motion on October 5, 2026. Because the current dismissal is without prejudice, the plaintiffs maintain the legal standing to pursue future litigation regarding the protest bans.

Texas Department of Public Safety troopers issued one-year bans in August 2025.
The Texas Attorney General's Office filed a motion to dismiss in September 2026.
Plaintiffs filed for voluntary dismissal on October 5, 2026.

Political Context

Opponents of the state's actions argue that the use of one-year bans infringes on fundamental First Amendment rights and constitutes an overreach of executive authority at the Texas State Capitol. They contend that dismissing the case as moot avoids a necessary judicial ruling on the legality of such long-term restrictions on public access.

While the lawsuit is ending, the dismissal without prejudice preserves the right of the plaintiffs to bring future claims against the state. Residents should note that the expiration of these bans marks a return to normal access policies for those specific individuals at the Texas State Capitol.

The takeaway

This case highlights the complexities of challenging short-term administrative bans that may expire before a court can issue a final ruling. Citizens involved in protest activity should track the specific duration of such restrictions as they may impact their eligibility to enter government facilities.