Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.
Attorney General Ken Paxton on Friday asked the Texas Supreme Court to expel 13 Democrats from the state House, the latest in a flurry of unprecedented actions aiming to resume business at the Capitol and pass new congressional maps to benefit Republicans.
Gov. Greg Abbott previously asked the court to expel Houston Rep. Gene Wu, the chair of the Texas House Democrats.
Wu is also named in Paxton’s petition, alongside Reps. John Bucy, Lulu Flores, Vikki Goodwin, Gina Hinojosa and James Talarico of Austin, Jessica González and Mihaela Plesa of Dallas, Suleman Lalani of Sugar Land, Christina Morales of Houston, Ron Reynolds of Missouri City, Ana-María Rodríguez Ramos of Richardson and Chris Turner of Grand Prairie.
Paxton argued that these representatives effectively abandoned their offices by leaving the state Sunday to stop the House from passing a new congressional map that would redraw district lines with the aim of netting five seats for Republicans.
“Respondents’ conduct amounts to an intentional, concerted effort to stop all legislative activity by refusing to show up — let alone hear testimony, debate, or vote on legislation,” Paxton wrote in the filing. “By any metric that constitutes abandonment of office.”
Legal experts say it does not amount to abandoning office if a member intentionally does not show up for work in an effort to stymie the passage of a bill that their constituents oppose. Texas lawmakers have engaged in these “quorum breaks” since the 1870s and none have ever been expelled as a direct result of leaving the chamber.
When Democrats left the state in 2021, the courts ruled that the Texas Constitution specifically enables “quorum-breaking,” but also allows for “quorum-forcing,” in which the chambers find ways to lure members back. Since then, the House passed new rules fining members $500 for every day they are gone.
Citing that case, Paxton said allowing members to participate in a quorum break would “upset the ‘careful balance’ of powers that this Court recognized … leaving the Texas Legislature unable to force a quorum and the people of Texas without a body capable of exercising legislative power.”
In a response to Abbott’s lawsuit, Wu disputed the premise of both cases, saying he had not abandoned his office.
“To the contrary, he continues to carry out his legislative duties as his judgment dictates,” lawyers for Wu wrote in the Friday afternoon filing. They asked for the case to be dismissed, noting that Wu had not died, nor had he been expelled by the House by a two-thirds vote or voluntarily resigned — any of which would be grounds for removal from office under state law.
If the case was not dismissed, Wu’s lawyers argued that the Supreme Court was not the correct venue, as the Houston lawmaker had a right to a jury trial before he would be removed. They also contended the entire case seemed to be based on hearsay.
“Given that the Governor has included no proper statement of facts or record to respond to — itself a grave due process problem — Respondent generally disputes the factual allegations that are scattered throughout the petition, such as they are,” the filing said.
Earlier in the week, Paxton himself seemed to indicate the case might need to go through the district courts, rather than starting at the Texas Supreme Court, telling conservative podcaster Benny Johnson that his office might have to undergo a lengthy and complicated legal battle that could involve filing in each member’s district.
“We’d have to go through a court process, and we’d have to file that maybe in districts that are not friendly to Republicans,” Paxton said. “So it’s a challenge because every district would be different.”
But in Friday’s filing, he argued that the Texas Supreme Court has the right to rule directly on this case, especially when there is a need to swiftly resolve the matter.
Bucy, in a statement, said he would not be returning to Texas because of Paxton’s lawsuit.
“This seat belongs to the people of Texas House District 136 — not Ken Paxton,” he said. “I am not afraid. I am not backing down.”
If the court were to find that the seats were vacant, they would be filled through a special election. But in the meantime, the vacancies would reduce the number of members required to meet the quorum threshold.
Paxton previously challenged Abbott’s ability to bring his suit against Wu, citing a part of state law that says this type of petition must be filed by the attorney general, or a county or district attorney. Abbott argued he was filing under a different provision and asked the court to uphold his right to bring the case. The Texas Supreme Court is made up entirely of Republicans and six of the nine were appointed by Abbott.
On Friday, Paxton also announced he was suing former U.S. Rep. Beto O’Rourke and his fundraising group, Powered by People, for providing financial support to the Democrats while they are out of state. The lawsuit, filed in a Tarrant County district court, said the group was “intentionally blurring the dichotomy between political and personal funds in a deceptive and confusing manner to take advantage of donors.” Paxton previously said he was investigating O’Rourke for allegations of bribery related to the quorum break.
O’Rourke filed his own lawsuit against Paxton in El Paso district court, saying the Republican was “bluntly using the vast power of the Attorney General’s office to effectuate a fishing expedition, constitutional rights be damned.” He asked a judge to block Paxton from investigating him or Powered by People, and to rule that Paxton violated both the U.S. and Texas constitutions in initiating the case in the first place.
Shape the future of Texas at the 15th annual Texas Tribune Festival, happening Nov. 13–15 in downtown Austin! We bring together Texas’ most inspiring thinkers, leaders and innovators to discuss the issues that matter to you. Get tickets now and join us this November.
TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.
Source link