A Texas judge has ordered the mysterious senders behind millions of unsolicited texts and mailers that impersonated a transgender advocacy nonprofit to answer questions under oath, setting up a Friday deposition that could finally unmask who paid for one of the strangest election-season operations in the country. The Texas mystery mailers ruling came late Tuesday, October 27, 2026, when Travis County District Judge Jan Soifer ruled from the bench that a representative of the Wyoming-registered Texas Transgender Student Union must sit for a deposition over Zoom on Friday, October 30, and she denied the group's bid to throw the case out. The ruling is a major win for the Transgender Education Network of Texas, known as TENT, which says it never sent the messages, never authorised the mailers, and has faced threats and harassment since they began landing in mailboxes and on phones across the state.

Key Points

• Travis County District Judge Jan Soifer ordered a representative of the Texas Transgender Student Union to sit for a deposition over Zoom on Friday, October 30, 2026, and denied the group's motion to dismiss the case.
• Soifer also ordered Infobip, the messaging company whose client sent the texts, to answer written deposition questions, with those answers due on Thursday.
• TENT says it never sent the texts or mailers, which used its name, website, photos, logo and merchandise branding; its lawyer estimated 3.6 to 4.2 million mailers were sent.
• The texts began arriving on Texas phones on October 12 and the mailers on October 17, two days before early voting began on October 19, ahead of the November 3 midterm elections.
• The Wyoming group will appeal the ruling to the Austin-based 3rd Court of Appeals, while a West Texas district attorney is separately investigating the mailers as possible forgery.

What Happened

The hearing took place on Tuesday in a downtown Austin courtroom, where the central question was whether TENT could force the senders to identify themselves before the election. TENT filed what is known as a Rule 202 petition on October 22 in Travis County District Court, asking Judge Soifer to allow it to take pre-suit depositions from the people behind the campaign. Rule 202 is a Texas procedure that lets a party investigate a potential claim before filing a lawsuit, and TENT argued that it needed the senders' identities to pursue claims that the campaign unlawfully impersonated the nonprofit.

Soifer sided with TENT. Her ruling ordered a representative of the Texas Transgender Student Union, the Wyoming limited liability company whose name appears on the mailers, to sit for a deposition over Zoom on Friday, reported by CNN as scheduled for 9 a.m. The judge also ordered Infobip, the Croatian communications company that transmitted the text messages on behalf of a client, to respond to written deposition questions by Thursday. TENT and Infobip also agreed on a protective order that will keep some of the customer's confidential information private, which Soifer said she will sign.

The Wyoming group's lawyer, Chris Hilton, argued that a deposition would strip the group of its First Amendment right to speak anonymously, and that exposing his clients' identities before the election would amount to a political ploy and to doxxing, the public release of personal information that could cause them harm. In a written response to the court on Tuesday, the group said it has no plans to engage in any more communications like those at issue here. Hilton also told reporters after the hearing that his clients will stop sending out the pamphlets, but he would not answer questions about who they are. Hilton used to work for Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's office and was part of Paxton's defence team during his 2023 impeachment trial; he is both the Wyoming company's lawyer and the lawyer for the unnamed customer who registered the phone number with Infobip. Paxton's campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Background and Context

The campaign unfolded in two waves. First, text messages began arriving on phones across Texas on October 12, advertising guides on bathrooms and beyond for trans kids at school and offering to answer questions about gender-affirming care in Texas. The messages linked to TENT's website but did not identify the sender. Then, starting on October 17, professionally printed mailers began arriving in mailboxes across the state, addressed to the student at each household and titled Texas Trans and LGBTQ+ Student Resource Guide. The pamphlets were marketed as resources for LGBTQ+ youth by the Texas Transgender Student Union, and they included sections encouraging young people to speak with a safe adult or one of several advocacy groups, including TENT, if their parents do not support their identity, plus a section about emancipation, the process by which a minor becomes legally recognised as an adult.

TENT forcefully denied any involvement. The nonprofit said the materials falsely linked it to the communications, using its website address, photographs from its events, images of its merchandise and its logo, and its website now carries a disclaimer stating that the texts and mailers were not authored, authorised, approved or distributed by TENT. On October 14, TENT sent cease-and-desist notices to Peerless Network and Infobip, two mass-texting platforms used by an unnamed client to send the messages. Infobip has said it notified its customer, suspended the relevant category of messaging traffic pending review, and directed the customer to cooperate, while adding that it did not author or originate the content.

The scale is striking: TENT's attorney, Mimi Marziani, told Judge Soifer that she estimated between 3.6 and 4.2 million mailers were sent. The address listed on the mailers is one digit removed from the correct address for TENT's post office box, and in court Hilton said the address should in fact have been the same as TENT's and attributed the difference to a typo. The Texas Transgender Student Union itself was registered in Wyoming just last month and has a mailing address linked to a post office box in Houston. The timing is what makes the campaign politically explosive: the mailers make no reference to any specific candidate or campaign, but they arrived just as early voting began on October 19, in a midterm election in which Republicans have made Democratic support for transgender rights a major issue. In the Texas Senate race, Paxton, the Republican candidate, has attacked his Democratic opponent, State Representative James Talarico, over past statements in support of transgender youth, with advertisements claiming that Talarico is for they/them.

Texas Mystery Mailers: What the Court Ordered and What Happens Friday

The practical effect of Soifer's ruling is that the senders can no longer hide behind anonymity while the election is under way, at least in the courtroom. On Friday, a representative of the Wyoming company must answer questions under oath about the identity of its owners, its involvement with the mailers, and whether it coordinated with other groups on the brochures. Infobip's written answers by Thursday could reveal how the text operation was set up, who registered the West Texas area code phone number used to send the texts, and where the money came from. That testimony will not necessarily become public immediately: the protective order is designed to keep some customer information private, and the Wyoming group has already appealed to the Austin-based 3rd Court of Appeals, which could complicate or delay the release of any names.

A separate criminal track is also running. In West Texas, Republican District Attorney Sarah Stogner opened a criminal investigation into the mailers last week, saying they were apparent forgeries intended to influence voters. Forgery is a state jail felony in Texas, and a grand jury could subpoena anyone involved to testify about who created and paid for the mailers, where the mailing list came from, and whether there was any improper use of personal information. Stogner has said her office is currently investigating only the mailers, not the texts, and that the inquiry began after a neighbour in her jurisdiction received one.

Reactions and Quotes

TENT's lawyers welcomed the ruling. Marziani told reporters after the hearing that somebody has been impersonating the nonprofit and sending millions of unauthorised messages, and she said TENT is very pleased with Soifer's ruling, which Hilton has appealed. She countered Hilton's argument by saying the communications led to harassment and threats against TENT staff and that they could amount to illegally impersonating the nonprofit. Hilton framed the case very differently, arguing that TENT's rush to expose his clients' identities before the election is a political ploy: "They seek to inflict some of the same harms that they claim to be suffering, they seek to engage in electioneering." The Wyoming group's written response made the same First Amendment argument, saying a deposition would strip the group of its right to speak anonymously, even as it promised no further communications like those at issue.

The reaction beyond the courtroom has been partisan and fast. Conservative social media accounts amplified the mailers as soon as they appeared, presenting them as evidence of what transgender advocacy groups send to children, even after TENT denied sending them. The Texas Observer has described the mailers as one of at least two extraordinary stories aimed at discrediting Talarico in the final weeks of the Senate race, the other being a false claim early in October that Talarico had checked into a psychiatric hospital in Ohio, a claim that was quickly debunked. The mailers arrived in a race already awash in unverified claims, four days before voters decide.

Why It Matters

The case sits at the collision point of two powerful principles: the right to speak anonymously, which the Supreme Court has long protected, and the right not to be impersonated, which Texas law protects through its online impersonation and forgery statutes. Anonymous political speech is a staple of American elections, but impersonating a real organisation, using its logo, its photographs and its website to make voters believe it sent something it did not, is a different act, and TENT argues that is exactly what happened here. How Texas courts draw that line in the final days of a midterm election could shape how similar operations are treated in future races.

It also matters because of the sheer scale and the target: millions of mailers addressed to students, sent to homes across a state of 30 million people, designed to look like a resource guide for young people. When the organisation named on that branding says it never sent them, the question is not only who paid for them but whether voters were deliberately misled during early voting, when millions of Texans were already casting ballots. And the ruling comes with a clock: early voting in Texas ends on Friday, October 30, the same day as the deposition, and Election Day is Tuesday, November 3, so whatever the deposition reveals will arrive after most Texans have already voted.

What Happens Next

The immediate next step is Friday's deposition, due at 9 a.m. over Zoom, with Infobip's written answers due on Thursday. If the deposition goes ahead, TENT's lawyers will press for the owners' identities, the funding source, the mailing list, and any coordination with campaigns or political groups, though the protective order means some answers may initially stay confidential. Stogner's criminal investigation will continue on a separate track, with the possibility of grand jury subpoenas, and no charges have been announced. Meanwhile the election calendar moves on: early voting ends Friday, the campaigns make their final pitches over the weekend, and Texans vote on Tuesday, November 3, in a Senate race that will help decide control of the chamber.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who sent the mystery Texas mailers and texts?

Nobody knows yet. The mailers carry the name of the Texas Transgender Student Union, a Wyoming-registered company, and the texts came from a phone number registered with Infobip, but the people behind both have not been publicly identified. A court-ordered deposition on Friday, October 30, is meant to establish who they are.

What did Judge Jan Soifer actually order?

Soifer ordered a representative of the Texas Transgender Student Union to sit for a deposition over Zoom on Friday and denied the group's motion to dismiss the case. She also ordered Infobip to answer written deposition questions by Thursday, and she is expected to sign a protective order keeping some customer information confidential.

Will the senders' names become public?

Not necessarily right away. The protective order agreed by TENT and Infobip keeps some customer information private, and the Wyoming group has appealed to the 3rd Court of Appeals, so the deposition answers may stay confidential at first even if the questioning goes ahead.

Are the mailers illegal?

That has not been decided. TENT argues the campaign unlawfully impersonated the nonprofit, and District Attorney Sarah Stogner is investigating the mailers as possible forgery, a state jail felony. No charges have been announced, and the senders argue their anonymous speech is protected by the First Amendment.

Do the mailers name any candidate?

No. The mailers and texts make no reference to any specific candidate or campaign. Their significance is their timing, arriving during early voting in a midterm election, and their connection to the Texas Senate race, where transgender issues have been a major campaign theme.

Related coverage on US News Pulse: Trump Texas rallies: Paxton, methane plan and a Talarico surge on October 27, Vote Republican or else: Trump ties federal help to midterm wins in final days, and Noncitizen voting fight: judge orders Trump team to name every state pressured.