scotxblog.comSupreme Court of Texas Blog | Texas Appellate Law | Texas Supreme Court | Texas Appeals Law

See Newest Docket Updates Newest Opinions Status of Pending Cases Voting Stats Opinion Totals Cases from Each COA archives About the Author Appellate Services Talks & Slides Contact / Tips Email: You can get new blog posts by email . RSS Feed: New blog posts can be sent to your browser by RSS feed . Twitter: New posts also appear on our blog's Twitter feed . Blogroll 600 Camp Blawgletter Disputing Grits for Breakfast How Appealing Reverse & Render SCOTUSblog Sua Sponte Texas Appellate Law Blog Texas Appellate Watch Texas State & Local Tax Law Blog Volokh Conspiracy Court Sites Official Calendar, Supreme Court of Texas Official Site, Supreme Court of Texas Third Court of Appeals at Austin U.S. Fifth Circuit U.S. Supreme Court Reference Desk Texas Statutes Research Tools The Cert Pool A petition is filed to disqualify the Green Party nominee for Chief Justice Monday, August 17th, 2020 by Don Cruse · Comments Off on A petition is filed to disqualify the Green Party nominee for Chief Justice The first election case of the Fall has nothing to do with a virus. IN RE AMY CLARK MEACHUM, No. 20-0630 Petition filed on August 14, 2020 The […] The first election case of the Fall has nothing to do with a virus. IN RE AMY CLARK MEACHUM , No. 20-0630 Petition filed on August 14, 2020 The petition was filed on Friday afternoon on behalf of Amy Clark Meachum, the Democratic nominee for Chief Justice. It requests the disqualification of the Green Party nominee from the ballot. 1 The factual basis of the petition is straightforward: According to election records, the Green Party’s chosen nominee voted earlier this year in the Democratic Primary. Under Texas law, a person who votes in a primary election is deemed to be affiliated with that same party for the remainder of the election cycle. One application of that principle is that a “person who voted at a primary election … is ineligible for a place on the ballot for the succeeding general election … as … the nominee of a political party other than the party holding the primary in which the person voted…” Tex. Elec. Code §162.015(a)(2) . The mandamus petition was filed directly in the Texas Supreme Court and targets, as the respondent, the two co-chairs of the Green Party (who are responsible for enforcing this eligibility rule). The Court immediately requested a response, which is due on Tuesday. Update: The Statesman reported that the Green Party candidate dropped out of the race voluntarily in the wake of this suit. A motion to dismiss has been filed. For obvious reasons, I would expect the Chief Justice to recuse himself from this petition, but there is no notation on the docket to that effect yet. ↩ Comments Off on A petition is filed to disqualify the Green Party nominee for Chief Justice Tags: Case Notes Briefs for today’s oral argument about mail-in voting Wednesday, May 20th, 2020 by Don Cruse · Comments Off on Briefs for today’s oral argument about mail-in voting With the Texas appellate websites still down, I wanted to provide a blog post that collects in one place all the filings in the case […] With the Texas appellate websites still down, I wanted to provide a blog post that collects in one place all the filings in the case being argued today in the Texas Supreme Court about mail-in voting, and, specifically, what flexibility the statute permits county officials in determining “disability” in light of the coronavirus. There are two currently pending cases in the Texas Supreme Court on this topic, only one of which is (technically) set for argument today. 1 Today’s case is docket 20-0394, which is the Attorney General’s request for a writ of mandamus from the Texas Supreme Court directly compelling various county officials to act. These briefs are arranged in the spirit of “You can’t tell the players without a program.” Relator The party seeking relief in the Mandamus Petition is “The State of Texas,” being represented by the Attorney General. The AG also filed a short letter about the federal case in which an injunction was issued yesterday. Real parties in interest The AG brings this action against five county officials, each of whom has filed a response to the mandamus petition: Response Brief of Dana DeBeauvoir , in her official capacity as Travis County Clerk Response Brief of Remi Garza , in his official capacity as Cameron County Elections Administrator Response Brief of Toni Pippins-Poole , in her official capacity as Dallas County Elections Administrator Response Brief of Diane Trautman , in her official capacity as Harris County Clerk Response Brief of Lisa Wise , in her official capacity as El Paso County Elections Administrator Attempted intervenors Two sets of groups have sought to “intervene” in the case. (Normally, this type of intervention might happen in a district court, but the AG brought this action in a way that bypassed the district court.) Motion to Intervene by the Texas Democratic Party Motion to Intervene by League of Women Voters, et al. (the “Price Intervenors”) The proposed intervenors also filed this joint mandamus response brief addressing the merits of the case. The State filed a brief opposing these interventions . The Court has stated that it will treat these filings as being amicus curiae submissions rather than a formal intervention. Amicus groups Various groups and individuals have filed amicus briefs in this case. They include (as of the time of this blog post): Texas Public Policy Foundation (May 13) An emailed amicus submission from a citizen in Houston (May 14) Honest Elections Project (May 15) McCaffity for Congress (May 15) A group of Medical Doctors (May 19) A group of Healthcare Professionals and Institutions (May 19) A group including the National Medical Association Argument day itself The official submission schedule indicates that the State’s side will be argued by the Solicitor General, Kyle Hawkins. The county officials will be represented by three attorneys. It appears from the submission forms that the lead role will be taken by Scott Brister, who is representing Harris County. He has also submitted a set of bench exhibits for the Court’s reference during the argument. Travis County will be represented at argument by Sherine E. Thompson. Dallas County will be represented by Barbara S. Nichols. The related case, not technically being argued today, is docket 20-0401, which challenges a district court’s entry of a temporary injunction against the Attorney General. The Court has granted a stay in that case and has just requested a response, which is not due until Thursday (one day after this argument). ↩ Comments Off on Briefs for today’s oral argument about mail-in voting Tags: Case Notes · News and Links Orders of May 15, 2020 [updated] Friday, May 15th, 2020 by Don Cruse · Comments Off on Orders of May 15, 2020 [updated] With today’s orders list (PDF version), the Texas Supreme Court issued opinions in 4 argued cases and 1 case decided by per curiam without oral […] With today’s orders list ( PDF version ), the Texas Supreme Court issued opinions in 4 argued cases and 1 case decided by per curiam without oral argument. Update: Later on Friday, the Court issued an emergency stay in a mandamus action involving mail-in voting in Texas. It also set a related case for oral argument on May 20, 2020. That case is in Re State of Texas , No. 20-0394 . More about it is available in this later blog post . There are 17 argued cases remaining in which a decision is expected by the end of June. TOMMY YOWELL, GAIL YOWELL, HARRY GRAFF, EL TERICO, LLC AND CASUARINA INVESTMENTS, LLC (D/B/A LAR RESOURCES, LLC) v. GRANITE OPERATING COMPANY AND APACHE CORPORATION, ET AL. , No. 18-0841 contracts property EX PARTE E.H. , No. 18-0932 Opinion of the Court Dissenting IN RE COLTON LESTER , No. 18-1041 Opinion of the Court Dissenting Dissenting IN RE THE COMMITMENT OF MAURICE BLUITT , No. 18-1053 Opinion of the Court IN THE INTEREST OF Z.N., A CHILD , No. 19-0590 Per C...