§ 129A.004.Inapplicability

Two short exclusions, and the second is the consequential one.

Subsection (a): an action under this chapter may not be joined with an action filed under Title 1, 4, or 5 of the Family Code — the marriage, protective order, and parent-child titles.

That keeps the remedy out of family litigation, where it would risk becoming a tactical instrument in a custody or divorce dispute rather than a response to harassment of a child.

It also keeps the procedure clean. This chapter has its own lowered injunction standard, and grafting it onto a family case governed by different rules would produce confusion about which applied.

Subsection (b): the Texas Citizens Participation Act does not apply to an action under this chapter.

That exclusion is essential to the remedy working at all. The anti-SLAPP chapter is triggered by legal actions based on the exercise of the right of free speech, and cyberbullying is speech. Without this exclusion, every application would meet an early motion to dismiss carrying mandatory fees and sanctions against a losing plaintiff.

A parent seeking an urgent order to stop harassment of their child would face that exposure, which would deter the applications the chapter exists to enable.

The exclusion is categorical — not an exemption to be argued under the anti-SLAPP chapter’s own exemptions provision, but a statement that the chapter does not apply here at all.