Texas Supreme Court sets expedited schedule in Paxton, 13 House Dems case
The Texas Supreme Court has set an expedited schedule in a case filed by Attorney General Ken Paxton requesting the court remove 13 Texas House Democrats from office.
“Aligned parties are encouraged to consolidate their briefing to the extent practicable. The briefs should address all issues before the Court, including the import of the House of Representatives’ authority under TEX. CONST., art. III, §§ 8, 10, and 11. The petitions for writ of quo warranto remain under consideration by this Court,” the court’s instructions state.
The expedited briefing schedule allows the briefs to be filed up to midnight on the due date. The deadline for Paxton’s brief to be filed is Wednesday, August 20; 13 House Democrats’ response is due Friday, August 29. Reply briefs are due Thursday, Sept. 4.
The dates are the same as those the court set in the expedited briefing schedule for the lawsuit filed by Gov. Greg Abbott against state Rep. Gene Wu, D-Houston, The Center Square reported.
In this case, Paxton filed a petition for writs of quo warranto with the Texas Supreme Court to declare 13 House seats vacant currently held by Democrats who’ve left the state, The Center Square reported.
“The State of Texas brings this original proceeding for writs of quo warranto,” the petition states. “Respondents, thirteen members of the Texas House of Representatives, have fled from the State with the intent to, and for the admitted purpose of, interfering with the operation of the Legislature. Respondents have also willfully refused to return when the Legislature has been convened by the Governor and despite the Speaker of the House’s issuance of warrants for their arrest. Because Respondents have abandoned their offices as State Representatives, the Attorney General, on behalf of the State, seeks a declaration that those positions are vacant.”
The lawsuit requests the court to declare the following Texas House seats vacant:
District 27: Ron Reynolds; District 47: Vikki Goodwin; District 49: Gina Hinojosa; District 50: James Talarico; District 51: Lulu Flores; District 70: Mihaela Plesa; District 76: Suleman Lalani; District 101: Chris Turner; District 102: Ana-Maria Ramos; District 104: Jessica Gonzalez; District 136: John Bucy III; District 137: Gene Wu; District 145: Christina Morales.
The lawsuit focuses on 13 Democrats “who made incriminating public statements” about their refusal to return to Austin, “essentially confirming in their own words the very grounds for this legal action,” the Office of Attorney General said in a statement. “Texas law provides the Attorney General with explicit authority to represent the State in quo warranto actions and to appear before the Texas Supreme Court in matters where the State has a direct interest.”
“The Texas Constitution, statutes, and rules provide a broad range of tools for members of a legislative minority to be heard. But those tools do not include concerted effort by members of the minority to disrupt the functioning of the Legislature by abdicating their duties, including spurning the constitutional authority of the remaining members to compel their attendance,” Paxton said in a ness release. “When members of the Legislature disregard arrest warrants, refuse to perform their duties, and announce that they intend to prevent the Legislature from exercising its constitutional responsibilities, they have, through words and conduct, demonstrated an intent to relinquish and abandon their offices.”
The petition with the court was filed after the Texas House sued 33 House Democrats in Illinois. Soon after, the Texas House sued six Democrats in California. The lawsuits requested Illinois and California courts to domesticate Texas civil warrants in order for local authorities to arrest them and work with Texas law enforcement to return them to Texas, The Center Square reported.
The 13 Democrats Paxton sued have yet to file their responses with the court.
The majority of House Democrats have refused to return to Austin to prevent a Congressional redistricting bill from being passed. On Tuesday, the House did not meet quorum again. The Texas Constitution and House Rules require a quorum to be met to pass bills. While the Texas Senate continued to meet and passed all bills on the special session call, the bills will go nowhere until a quorum is reached in the House.
Five House Democrats are needed to return for a quorum to be reached. Abbott is expected to call a second special session on Friday as the first special session is coming to a close.
Sunny
Latest News Stories
Govt. shutdown leads to over 800 flights cancelled, number growing
Illinois approves $1.5B transit package, funding for long-delayed projects
Supreme Court allows Trump to withhold partial SNAP payment
Illinois quick hits: State EPA looks to fund EV charging stations; Tax Foundation says mayor’s proposal would hinder employment;
Casey Council Approves Over $2.45 Million in Bills, Renews $1.6 Million in CDs
Congressional Perks: Committees, caucuses cost $50 million since 2019
FAA funding problems hit airports in California, elsewhere
Judge bars ICE from acting against ‘protestors,’ ‘rapid response’ activists
Report: IL public schools show low academic proficiency, higher taxpayer funding
Watchdog: Special interest group paid legislators’ $25,000 resort bill
Union Pacific to ask appeals court for biometrics lawsuit exemption
Illinois quick hits: Notices of affected flights; injunction issued over ICE force
