Texas Passes First “No Retreat, No Undead” Law

By Bulletin Staff

The state of Texas has passed a first-in-the-nation “No Retreat, No Undead” law that makes it expressly legal for people to defend themselves against a zombie attack by destroying the undead creature through whatever means necessary.

The legislation, which is expected to be signed into law next week, is similar to so-called “stand your ground” laws adopted in many states that give a person who is attacked the right to not retreat and meet force with force, including deadly force, if they reasonably believe it necessary to do so to prevent death or serious bodily harm to themselves or others.

Stand your ground laws are an extension of the “castle doctrine,” under which people are allowed to use deadly force against intruders breaking into their homes. Stand your ground expands that doctrine to apply to anywhere people find themselves under threat.

“Sanctuary for the Living”

While Florida passed the first stand your ground law in 2005, with a number of states following in the years thereafter, Texas is the first state to extend the stand your ground concept explicitly to the undead.

Roy Zellin, a Texas state representative from Lubbock, said that he proposed the bill, officially called the “Zombie Slayer’s Sanctuary Act,” to ensure that Texans would not be held liable for actions taken to defend themselves against the undead.

“I’m proud that the Texas legislature has recognized the pressing need for Texans to defend themselves and their loved ones against the undead without hesitation or fear. With the passage of the ‘Zombie Slayer’s Sanctuary Act,’ we’ve taken a bold step to ensure that Texas remains a sanctuary for the living,” Zellin said in a statement marking the bill’s passage.

Potential Legal Issues

But Erin LaCroix, a law professor and research director at the Center for the Study of Zombies and the Law at the University of Pittsfield Law School in Pennsylvania, said that the Texas law raises a number of legal and ethical issues similar to controversies around stand your ground laws. In particular, LaCroix pointed to the potential for collateral damage or vigilantism.

“No one is arguing against the right of people to defend themselves if they are attacked by the living dead. But explicitly authorizing individuals to use ‘deadly force’ against the undead could lead to chaotic situations in which people make hasty judgments or endanger the lives of others in the process of dispatching zombies,” LaCroix said.

LaCroix added that language defining what constitutes a “zombie” was somewhat vague and ambiguous. Specifically, the bill states:

“A ‘zombie’ is defined as any reanimated or deceased individual, whether created through supernatural means, scientific experimentation or unknown causes, who exhibits behavior or characteristics inconsistent with normal human life. This may include, but is not limited to, lethargy, aggression, loss of cognitive function, decomposition or any other traits commonly associated with undead creatures. The determination of whether an entity qualifies as a ‘zombie’ shall be at the discretion of the individual faced with the perceived threat, taking into account their reasonable belief and the totality of the circumstances.”

“This bill’s definition deliberately leaves room for subjective interpretation, potentially allowing individuals to classify a wide range of entities as ‘zombies’ based on their perception and the situation at hand,” LaCroix said. “This ambiguity could lead to all sorts of unintended consequences, especially if someone claims to be defending themselves against ‘the living dead’ as cover for committing violence against actual living people.”

Opponents and Backers Speak Out

Ally Renoir, a Texas state representative from Austin and a critic of the bill, said that the law could foster distrust and fear within communities, potentially pitting neighbors against each other and eroding social cohesion. She argues that legislators could better spend their time creating programs devoted to researching and implementing alternative solutions to the zombie problem, such as containment, quarantine or finding a cure.

“My colleagues who backed this bill could point to literally not a single instance where someone who was attacked by a zombie was prosecuted for defending themselves with any means at their disposal. This whole idea of endorsing deadly force against anyone that you suspect might be a zombie trivializes the issue. We need to deal with the undead in a way that preserves our communities and protects all our citizens, especially the most vulnerable,” Renoir said in a statement after the bill passed.

Natalie Howell, director of the Jones Center for African-American Studies at Rye University in San Antonio and an expert on the impact of the undead phenomenon on the African American community, expressed concerns that the law could negatively impact minority communities in Texas.

“In a state with a history of more than 500 lynchings, of course I have deep concerns about the potential consequences this law. History has shown us that laws with broad interpretations can be subject to misuse, leading to the disproportionate targeting of marginalized communities. It is imperative that we ensure that this law does not lead to real-world injustices within our communities,” Howell said.

For its part, the group Gun Owners Against Zombies said that the bill’s passage was a “major victory for personal liberty and the right to self-defense against the undead.”

“Just as the Second Amendment safeguards our right to bear arms against everyday threats and perils, this legislation unequivocally asserts that, yes, even in the realm of the undead, Texans have the right to stand their ground and wield their firearms against the admittedly less common menace of the undead,” the group said in its statement praising passage of the bill.

Texas Governor Abbie McGregor is expected to sign the bill into law in the week ahead.

Note: The Bulletin of the Zombie Scientists is a work of fiction. Any names or characters, businesses or places, events or incidents, are fictitious. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is entirely coincidental.