FEATURED, FROM LEFT: Former U.S. Congressman (1997-2017) Rubén Hinojosa, D-Mercedes, and his wife, Martha López Hinojosa, and Sen. Juan Hinojosa, D-McAllen, at the 46th Annual International Museum of Art & Science Collage Gala held in McAllen on Saturday, September 6, 2025.
Photograph Courtesy SEN. JUAN HINOJOSA FACEBOOK
••••••
New state law shaped by Sen. Juan Hinojosa makes “zoombombing” – the disruption of virtual government meetings with offensive, sometimes hateful content – punishable by jail time and/or fines, reports South Texas attorney Omar Ochoa
By DAVID A. DÍAZ [email protected]
A new state law shaped by Sen. Juan Hinojosa, D-McAllen, makes “zoombombing” – which is the disruption of virtual government meetings with offensive, sometimes hateful content – now punishable by jail time, fines, or both, reports South Texas attorney Omar Ochoa.
The term “zoombombing” comes from the combination of the video conferencing application Zoom and the term “photobombing”. It gained popularity in early 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic, when millions of people began using Zoom for school, work, and social events.
Zoom is a cloud-based platform for video and audio conferencing, live chat, and webinars, allowing people to connect with each other online for virtual meetings and collaboration. It works by enabling users to create or join virtual meeting rooms where they can communicate via video, audio, and text, share their screens, and exchange files. Users need a device with an internet connection, a camera, and a microphone to participate, with options to join meetings using a provided link or meeting ID.
A virtual government meeting is a meeting of government members, officials, and the public that is conducted entirely online or via teleconference, rather than at a physical location. These meetings use video conferencing, teleconferencing, or web conferencing platforms to allow participation, foster transparency, and enable remote access for both officials and citizens to engage in the democratic process.
Virtual meetings offer greater accessibility for the public, improve communication between government agencies and citizens, and can increase engagement and satisfaction with local government.
Being “online” means that a computer or hand-held device is connected to a network, usually the Internet. The opposite is “offline”, which means that a computer is disconnected for the Internet or other network.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/online
A teleconference is a conference with participants in different locations linked by telecommunications devices.
Videoconferencing is a technology that enables real-time, face-to-face communication between two or more people in different locations through live audio and video transmission over the Internet. It uses devices like computers, webcams, and microphones to allow participants to see, hear, and interact with each other from virtually anywhere, facilitating meetings, presentations, interviews, and more in a virtual setting.
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=what+is+videoconferencing&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
“According to the bill analysis of the measure, known as House Bill 5238, concerns had been raised that state law prohibiting the disruption of lawful gatherings did not extend to meetings held on virtual platforms, which may be susceptible to electronic interference and hacking,” Ochoa noted. “As a result of this new state law, which went into effect on Monday, September 1, 2025, the disruption of such a meeting through electronic disturbance, including hacking, of any virtual component of the meeting, procession, or gathering now qualify as a Class B misdemeanor, which can result in up to 180 days in jail, a fine of as much as $2,000, or both upon conviction.”
In Texas, Class B misdemeanors also include, but are not limited to:
• Possession of up to two ounces of marijuana;
• Burglary of a vehicle;
• Criminal trespass;
• Making a false police report;
• Public intoxication; and
• Disorderly conduct.
https://mac.harriscountytx.gov/about-texas-misdemeanors
“Hacking” refers to the act of gaining unauthorized access to a computer system or network. It can involve various methods and motivations, ranging from malicious attacks to ethical explorations of vulnerabilities. While often associated with illegal activity and data theft, hacking can also be used for defensive purposes, such as identifying and fixing security flaws.
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=what+is+hacking&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
A bill analysis is a document prepared for all bills and joint resolutions reported out of committee. A bill analysis may include background information on the measure, a statement of purpose or intent, and an analysis of the content of the measure.
A bill is a type of legislative measure that requires passage by both chambers of the legislature and action by the governor in order to become effective. A bill is the primary means used to create and change the laws of the state.
Sen. Juan Hinojosa was the Senate sponsor of House Bill 5238, and in that role, he was responsible for securing Senate approval for the legislation.
Legislation is a proposed or enacted law or group of laws.
https://tlc.texas.gov/docs/legref/Glossary.pdf
Rep. Ray López, D-San Antonio, was the primary author of House Bill 5238, which means he wrote the language of the bill and guided it through the House of Representatives for its approval.
“Virtual events have become increasingly common and as public and governmental bodies continue to rely on virtual platforms for meetings and events, there have been instances of individuals intentionally disrupting virtual proceedings through electronic interference, including hacking or accessing these proceedings without authorization. House Bill 5238 now provides law enforcement officers and prosecutors with clearer authority to act in cases where digital disruptions impede lawful proceedings,” Hinojosa explained.
On Wednesday, April 16, 2025, López presented his House Bill 5238 before the House Committee on Government Efficiency for their review and action. The committee members unanimously recommended that the Legislature approve his legislation.
“Let’s start out by telling you a real quick story. On February 26 of this year (2025), I was holding a virtual meeting for my constituents. My town hall was hacked by multiple unknown actors who proceeded to display pornography, profanity, Nazi symbols and the like, across my presentation at the town hall meeting,” he recalled during the committee public hearing.
Luckily, his staff was able to intercept that, and stopped the disturbance relatively quick, but not before the offensive intrusion had occurred.
“Fortunately, my constituents who were on the call all understood, were rather frustrated with the intrusion into our meeting. That town hall was official government business. Just like any other in-person town hall, should be subject to the same protections and status,” López said.
López further testified:
“In an effort to go after and criminalize these bad actors, my team and I discovered that the Texas Penal Code concerning the disruption of meetings does not extend to the disruption of virtual meetings, and is only concerned with the physical disruptions. House Bill 5038 would fix this loophole and modernize the Penal Code to include the disruption of virtual meetings as a Class B misdemeanor.
“As we move forward in time, virtual meetings as government business will only become more common place. Bad actors looking to cause disruptions will have more targets, especially when those disruptive acts are encouraged by lack of negative consequences. Acting now will discourage bad actors in the future from disrupting virtual government meetings.”
“Zoombombing” hit close to home this year – during a meeting of the Mission City Council in September 2025 – which is located in Hinojosa’s Senate District 20.
“Mission says it will no longer use Zoom for city council meetings after a participant unaffiliated with the city hijacked Tuesday’s publicly accessible meeting livestream and played clips of pornography,” Matt Wilson, a journalist with the Mission Progress Times reported on Tuesday, September 16, 2025. “The clips were extremely graphic.”
“At no point was anything other than the ongoing City Council meeting shown on the City Hall screens, cameras, or inside the Council Chamber,” a statement from the city said, Wilson noted.
According to Google artificial intelligence online review of the episodein Mission:
The incident occurred when someone gained access to the livestream and displayed pornographic images.
The perpetrator also used a racial slur as a screen name at one point.
City staff were unable to remove the disruptive participants, which led to the termination of the meeting's Zoom portion.
In response, the City of Mission decided to stop using the Zoom platform for its city council meetings.
While the city will no longer use Zoom for meetings, it will continue to stream its proceedings on YouTube to ensure public access.
At the Wednesday, April 16, 2025 public hearing of the Texas Legislature’s House Committee on Government Efficiency, the witnesses who signed up to speak or register for and against House Bill 5038 were:
Witnesses For — (Registered, but did not testify: Melissa Shannon, Bexar County Commissioners Court; Christine Wright, City of San Antonio; Spencer Gutiérrez, City of Sugar Land, Texas; Jennifer Szimanski, Combined Law Enforcement Associations of Texas (CLEAT); Ben Zeller, Rick Thompson, and Larry Woolley, County Judges & Commissioners Association of Texas; Larry Woolley, Johnson County).
Witness Against — (Registered, but did not testify: Daniel Woodward, Texas Civil Rights Project).
Born and raised in Edinburg, Ochoa’s roots run deep in the community.
A graduate of Edinburg North High School, he went on to earn a business degree, a master’s in accounting, and a law degree from the University of Texas at Austin.
A champion for government transparency, Ochoa provides regular reports to the public on the Texas Public Information Act, the Texas Open Meetings Act, and existing and proposed state laws that affect the mainstream and social media and the people’s rights to know about the actions of their governments in the Lone Star State.
The Texas Public Information Act provides a mechanism for citizens to inspect or copy government records. It also provides that governmental bodies may withhold government records from the public in specific instances.
The Texas Open Meetings Act ensures transparency and accountability by requiring meetings of governmental bodies to be open to the public, except for specific, authorized closed sessions, and requires public notice of the time, place, and subject matter of the meeting.
The specific language of House Bill 5238 that became state law on Monday, September 1, 2025 follows:
An Act relating to the criminal offense of disrupting a meeting or procession.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Section 42.05(a), Penal Code, is amended to read as follows:
(a) A person commits an offense if, with intent to prevent or disrupt a lawful meeting, procession, or gathering, whether in person or virtual, the person obstructs or interferes with the meeting, procession, or gathering by:
(1) physical action;
(2) verbal utterance; or
(3) electronic disturbance, including hacking, of any virtual component of the meeting, procession, or gathering.
SECTION 2. The change in law made by this Act applies only to an offense committed on or after the effective date of this Act.
An offense committed before the effective date of this Act is governed by the law in effect on the date the offense was committed, and the former law is continued in effect for that purpose. For purposes of this section, an offense was committed before the effective date of this Act if any element of the offense occurred before that date.
SECTION 3. This Act takes effect September 1, 2025.
••••••
Zoombombing has caused significant disruptions, exposed vulnerabilities, and prompted security changes in Texas governmental meetings at both local and state levels.
Incidents have included racist and vulgar language, graphic images, and hacking attacks.
Examples of zoombombing in Texas
• Temple City Council (August 2025): A virtual meeting was interrupted by a voice shouting racial slurs and inflammatory remarks, which sparked legal concerns.
https://www.tdtnews.com/news/central_texas_news/article_ac8aa4d8-ac4c-4692-a5c7-757c0a96a03a.html
• Texas House Committee on Hostile Foreign Organizations (September 2024): A hearing livestream was hacked with Russian propaganda, racist usernames, and anti-American messages in the chat. The committee had to continue its work via an audio-only recording.
• Harris County Court Proceedings (December 2022): Unauthorized screen sharing displayed pornographic material during virtual court sessions. Officials swiftly implemented new security measures to prevent future incidents.
• Bexar County Court Hearings (August 2020): Hearings were temporarily stopped when a "Zoom bomber" broadcast inappropriate material. The session was restarted after credentials were changed, and a judge noted that such disruption is punishable as direct contempt of court.
• Southeast Texas virtual town hall (October 2020): A candidate forum was disrupted by users who displayed hate speech on the screen.
• Workforce Solutions virtual town hall (April 2020): A meeting with officials from the Texas Workforce Commission was disrupted twice by racist slurs and loud music before officials had to reschedule it.
Effects on government meetings
• Disruption of government functions. The incidents have forced delays, restarts, and other pauses in public meetings and court hearings.
• Challenges to public transparency. Some meetings have had to remove the public livestream, or post an edited version later, raising concerns about transparency and public access.
• Heightened cybersecurity awareness.Attacks prompted the Texas Department of Information Resources (DIR) to issue security guidelines for virtual collaboration tools. This includes recommendations for password-protected meetings, limiting screen-sharing, and using waiting rooms.
• Revised meeting protocols. Many governmental bodies now implement specific security measures for virtual meetings. These include disabling the chat feature, muting participants on entry, and limiting who can share their screens.
• Clarification of legal consequences. In the Bexar County case, a judge emphasized that such digital disruption is subject to contempt of court laws, just as it would be in person.
• Review of Texas Open Meetings Act. Early in the pandemic, Gov. Greg Abbott issued temporary suspensions of some requirements of the Texas Open Meetings Act to allow for virtual meetings while still maintaining public access and recording requirements. The rise of virtual meetings made necessary by the COVID-19 pandemic brought new forms of disruption to Texas governmental bodies, forcing officials to adapt their security measures and balancing public access with the need to prevent malicious interference.
Reports in 2025 show that zoombombing continues to disrupt public and private virtual meetings across the U.S.
While the frequency of incidents is lower than during the initial COVID-19 pandemic, bad actors still exploit public meeting links and security vulnerabilities to broadcast racist, pornographic, and other threatening content.
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=zoombombing+in+the+U.S.+2025&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
••••••
For more on this and other Texas legislative news stories that affect the Rio Grande Valley metropolitan region, please log on to Titans of the Texas Legislature (TitansoftheTexasLegislature.com).
