On May 12, 2025, Texas Governor Greg Abbott sent shockwaves through the political landscape by announcing his imminent signing of a controversial bill that will ban individuals, entities, and governments from China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea from buying or owning land in the Lone Star State. The decision, which Abbott framed as a necessary measure to protect Texas from foreign adversaries, has ignited a firestorm of debate, with critics labeling it a discriminatory overreach and supporters hailing it as a bold stand against national security threats. The announcement, made via a post on X, marks the culmination of years of legislative efforts to curb foreign influence in Texas, but it has also reopened wounds for immigrant communities who fear being unfairly targeted.
The bill, known as Senate Bill 17 (SB17), was championed by Republican state Representative Cole Hefner and Senator Lois Kolkhorst, who have long argued that foreign entities from these nations pose a significant risk to Texas’ sovereignty and security. Hefner, in a recent interview, described the legislation as the “strongest bill in the nation” against what he calls America’s four biggest adversaries. The law prohibits not only governments but also citizens and companies tied to China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea from acquiring any real property in Texas, including agricultural, commercial, and residential land. It also grants the Texas Attorney General sweeping powers to investigate violations and seize properties acquired in defiance of the ban, a provision that has raised alarms among civil rights advocates.
Abbott’s decision to sign the bill comes after years of escalating tensions between the U.S. and the targeted nations, particularly China. The governor has repeatedly pointed to incidents like the 2021 purchase of over 140,000 acres near Laughlin Air Force Base by a Chinese billionaire as evidence of a growing threat. “Texas will not allow hostile nations to gain a foothold on our soil,” Abbott declared in his announcement, echoing sentiments he has voiced since 2023 when he first expressed support for similar legislation. He also referenced his recent executive orders cracking down on alleged Chinese espionage, including measures to divest state funds from China and ban state employees from accepting gifts or traveling to adversary countries for work.
However, the bill has sparked fierce opposition from civil rights groups and immigrant communities, who argue that it unfairly targets individuals based on their national origin. Azadeh Shahshahani, legal and advocacy director for Project South, called the law a “witch hunt” that echoes historical patterns of discrimination justified by national security concerns. “This bill perpetuates anti-immigrant bias and racism,” Shahshahani said in a statement, pointing out that even legal residents and visa holders from the four countries could be affected if they lack U.S. citizenship. Protests erupted in cities like Houston and Dallas as news of the impending signing spread, with demonstrators holding signs reading “Stop SB17” and “We Belong Here.”
Critics also highlight the economic implications of the ban. China, despite being labeled an adversary, has been a significant investor in Texas, contributing over $3 billion in capital investments over the past decade, according to the Texas Economic Development Council. Some worry that the law could provoke retaliation from China, potentially impacting Texas exports like agriculture, which rely heavily on the Port of Houston for trade routes to Asia. “This isn’t just about security—it’s about punishing entire communities for the actions of their governments,” said State Representative Gene Wu, a Houston Democrat who has been a vocal opponent of the bill since its inception in 2023.
On the other side, supporters argue that the law is a necessary safeguard in an era of heightened geopolitical tension. Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller has long called for such measures, warning that allowing “Red China” to own Texas farmland poses a direct threat to the state’s food security. “If you’re acting on behalf of a hostile foreign adversary, we’re going to take that land back,” Hefner emphasized, stressing that the bill focuses on actions and affiliations, not race or nationality. The law does include exemptions for U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents, a concession added after earlier versions of the bill faced backlash for being overly broad.
The debate over SB17 reflects a broader national trend, with states like Florida enacting similar restrictions under Governor Ron DeSantis. Yet Texas’ law is seen as particularly stringent, given its wide scope and the state’s history of tough stances on immigration and foreign policy. As the bill becomes law, its impact on Texas’ immigrant communities, economy, and political landscape remains uncertain. Will it bolster security as intended, or will it deepen divisions and provoke unintended consequences? For now, the controversy shows no signs of abating, with both sides digging in for a protracted battle over the future of Texas.
