Texas

Did Texas House Members Violate the Texas Open Meetings Act When Redistricting?

Election Law Society · March 16, 2022 ·

By: Sarah Depew

On October 18, 2021, the Mexican American Legislative Caucus (MALC), the largest and oldest Latino legislative caucus in the nation, issued a public statement on their Twitter account stating that they filed a petition for deposition in order to investigate a possible violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act. More specifically, the public statement raised concerns about the possibility of secret communications and decision-making in Texas’ redistricting process.

Bready or Not: Texas, 2022 Redistricting, and Donut-Shaped Districts

Election Law Society · March 9, 2022 ·

It has been ten years, a decennial census, and the Republican-controlled Texas legislature has redrawn the state maps, with incumbents finding themselves drawn out of their own districts and would-be challengers finding paths to success becoming narrower, donut- and donut-hole districts, and a flurry of legal and public pushback against the announced maps.

Incumbent Representative Vicente Gonzalez, whose district pre-redistricting was the Rio Grande Valley’s District 15, has announced his intent to run in the new District 34 – in part because his home is in the new district’s boundaries. In north Texas, similar issues are taking place: Salman Bhojani, a Democratic candidate for Texas Senate District 9 since May 2021, recently announced the end of his campaign after the redrawn maps completely changed District 9 from a competitive one to a safe Republican district. And when redrawing lines, even the party in charge cannot always avoid collateral damage, as in the odd case of District 34 losing six Republican-leaning counties to an adjacent district, just as the Republican Party had been making meaningful headway and the long-term Democratic incumbent was retiring. However, incumbent district-jumping isn’t new, at least for Texas. Longtime Congressman Lloyd Doggett, first elected to Congress in 1995, has already survived redrawing and jumping into new districts, and is looking to do so again with a jump from District 35 to District 37.

The Future of Senate Bill 97 and its Consequences: Part II

Election Law Society · February 16, 2022 ·

Part I of this blog post discussed Texas Senate Bill 97, and the dangerous changes it would make to election audits in Texas. The proposed bill was put forward to address unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud that allegedly transpired during the 2020 presidential election, and it appears to be an element of a larger campaign by Trump’s Republican coalition to undermine the results of that election. Critics argue that Senate Bill 97 would create an unnecessary and potentially dangerous election auditing system.

The Future of Senate Bill 97 and its Consequences

Election Law Society · January 19, 2022 ·

By: Zachary Daniel

Shortly before former president Trump called for Texas Governor Greg Abbot to perform a “forensic audit” of the 2020 election in the state, the Texas legislature proposed Senate Bill 97 as a remedy for the concerns over the unsubstantiated allegations of election fraud. If passed, the audits authorized by the bill could easily be weaponized because the bill empowers partisan political actors and the secretary of state over the county electoral process, and simultaneously burdens the counties. The bill has raised concerns among election law activists in Texas, who argue it would have a harmful, long-term impact on the state’s election system.

In the months following the 2020 election, Republican coalitions in states across the country called for audits of election results in four swing states in the name of uncovering alleged voter fraud. In response, the Republican-dominated legislature of Arizona appointed a private firm to investigate the accusations. After months of uncertainty, as well as squandered time, effort, and money, the audit ended and the results were published, showing no indication of fraud. Unfortunately for the rest of the nation, the damage had been done.

If You’re Gonna Vote in Texas (You Gotta Have a Legally-Qualifying Building?)

Election Law Society · November 1, 2021 ·

It starts with tents in Houston and turns into a legal melee with forty-eight interested parties in federal court. The November 2020 elections were particularly newsworthy, featuring a contentious presidential race happening many months into an ongoing pandemic. So how do tents and Black’s Law Dictionary come into it?

Harris County, whose county seat is Houston, Texas, responded to public concerns about voting during COVID by expanding “curbside voting” during early voting with drive-through, multi-car tents (as seen here). Curbside voting has long been allowed through Texas Election Code Chapter 64 (Voting Procedures), § 64.009 – Voter Unable to Enter Polling Place. Inability was broadly defined in the Code as “physically unable to enter the polling place without personal assistance or likelihood of injuring the voter’s health,” the latter provision utilized to justify the drive-through voting. However, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton released guidance pushing back on this, stating “[f]ear of COVID-19 does not render a voter physically unable to cast a ballot inside a polling place without assistance,” while still recognizing election officials should not question a voter’s qualifications for being “physically unable” to enter the building.