Opinions

Cumulative Digest of Ethics Advisory Opinions

2026

2026 Opinions

EAO No. 638 (2026) – A request seeking the clarification of the operation of a law or to seek compliance with an existing law, without suggesting an answer, is not a communication to influence administrative or legislative action under Chapter 305 of the Government Code and would not require lobby registration.

EAO No. 639 (2026) – Section 255.003 applies to officers and employees of a political subdivision. For purposes of Section 255.003 of the Election Code, a charter school is not a political subdivision. Therefore, the use of a charter school’s resources would not implicate Section 255.003. However, political advertisement video recorded at a charter school would raise concerns of violations of Section 253.094 of the Election Code, and possibly Sections 36.08 and 39.02 of the Penal Code.

EAO No. 640 (2026) – A former state employee participates on behalf of a state agency in a procurement or contract negotiation with a subcontractor if the subcontractor is identified as providing work in the contract.

EAO No. 641 (2026) – The TRE flier prepared by the district constitutes political advertising because it advocates for passage of the TRE and, therefore, would violate Section 255.003(a) of the Election Code if distributed to voters by the district.

EAO No. 642 (2026) – When considering whether a specific video constitutes political advertising for the purposes of the Election Code, we view the communication as a whole. A significant factor in determining whether a particular communication is a political advertisement is whether it provides information without promoting a public office or measure.

The mere fact that a communication includes an express disclaimer of support or opposition is not determinative. However, the video considered in this opinion is a political advertisement for the purposes of Section 255.003 of the Election Code because it includes advocacy.

EAO No. 643 (2026) – Advisory opinions cannot adjudicate disputed facts. For the sake of the opinion, we assume that the contacts employed by state-owned or state-controlled universities are working on behalf of foreign adversaries.

In cases of frequent contacts with the same person, one report may be submitted every thirty days covering contacts during that time.

EAO No. 644 (2026) – The former TXDOT employee would not be barred from representing the requestor on the indicated projects, as they are not the same “particular matter” that the employee participated in while employed by TXDOT.

EAO No. 645 (2026) – Paying the requestor’s users for engaging with political advertising content through its advertising marketplace does not constitute bribery under Section 36.02(a)(1) of the Penal Code under the facts presented.

Payment of compensation to the requestor’s users to complete a survey that includes questions about the user’s voting intentions—where compensation is identical regardless of the user’s answers does not constitute bribery under Section 36.02(a)(1) of the Penal Code.

Chapter 255 of the Election Code requires specific disclaimers and disclosures on political advertisements.

Use of the requestor’s advertising marketplace by candidates, political parties, and political committees does not violate Section 36.02(a)(1) of the Penal Code.

EAO No. 646 (2026) – Because all of the images used in the requestor’s campaign video that relate to the school district at issue were obtained through publicly accessible means, the video does not violate Section 255.003(a) of the Election Code or Section 39.02(a)(2) of the Penal Code.