AUSTIN, Texas—Tomorrow, attorneys from the Institute for Justice (IJ) will appear before the 15th Court of Appeals. They represent two Texans, Katherin Youniacutt and Tammy Thompson, who are suing to protect their right to work as social workers. Under Texas law, each woman is currently permanently ineligible for a social work license based solely on an old and irrelevant conviction. But the Texas Constitution protects Texans’ right to earn an honest living in an occupation of their choosing, free from unreasonable government interference. A lower court preliminarily concluded that the ban was “irrational.” If the ruling is upheld, the case will continue to trial where Katherine and Tammy will fight not just for their rights, but the rights of all Texans, to freely work.
Should people be judged solely on old mistakes? That’s what’s happening in Texas. Katherin and Tammy both struggled with substance abuse issues early in their lives and each woman pleaded guilty to a single assault conviction during that time. Nearly two decades later, Katherin and Tammy have turned their lives around and want to help people facing similar problems.
Texas won’t let them. A 2019 Texas law imposed a new, permanent punishment on Katherin and Tammy: Despite their rehabilitation, they are forever barred from working as social workers.
This law not only hurts Katherin and Tammy, but also comes at a time when Texas—and the country—face an exploding mental health and substance abuse crisis coupled with a dire shortage of professional social workers to address those issues. And Katherin and Tammy’s history overcoming the same challenges their clients face is an asset, not a reason to exclude them from practice. As the lower court acknowledged in denying the state’s motion to dismiss, “[a] categorical ban on personal experience directly relevant to a job is irrational.”
And the lower court agreed with IJ’s position that the law’s broad-brush approach likely violates the Texas Constitution. The state can, of course, exclude individuals who truly pose a danger to their clients. But that’s not Katherin, or Tammy, or many other aspiring social workers targeted by the state’s ban. As the lower court wrote: “any danger that otherwise qualified applicants . . . pose to potential clients is not rationally possible to determine on anything other than an individualized basis.” Texas used to provide that before the 2019 ban. All Katherin and Tammy are seeking is a chance to return to that individualized review.
“Katherin and Tammy made mistakes and paid for them. Permanently punishing them doesn’t protect the public. It just makes it harder for people to pull themselves up and provide for their families,” said IJ Attorney James Knight. “The state of Texas isn’t just wrong on these issues, it’s violating its own constitution in trying to uphold this ban.”
Founded in 1991, IJ litigates nationwide to defend property rights, economic liberty, educational choice, and free speech. IJ is leading the charge against permanent punishment laws across the country. In Pennsylvania, IJ won its challenge to a law requiring would-be cosmetologists to prove they had “good moral character” to work in skincare. In Tennessee, IJ stopped the FCC from revoking the broadcast license of Knoxville’s only Black-owned radio station because of the owner’s misstatement on his personal tax papers more than a decade earlier. And in Maryland, IJ halted a USDA policy banning store owners with convictions related to alcohol, drugs, or firearms from accepting SNAP payments.
# # #
To arrange interviews on this subject, journalists may contact Phillip Suderman, IJ’s Communications Project Manager, at [email protected] or (850) 376-4110. More information on the case is available at: https://ij.org/case/texas-fresh-start-social-worker/