Texas Supreme Court rules quorum-breaking Democrats can be arrested, returned to House chamber
Source: Dallas Morning News
The Texas Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that House Democrats boycotting a special legislative session can be arrested and forced back to chambers.
The legal question before this Court concerns only whether the Texas Constitution gives the House of Representatives the authority to physically compel the attendance of absent members, according to a written opinion signed by Justice James D. Blacklock, who wrote the opinion for the all-Republican court. We conclude that it does, and we therefore direct the district court to withdraw the TRO [temporary restraining order].
House Democrats broke quorum during a July special session to stall a GOP-driven elections bill that they contend is designed to suppress the votes of Black and Hispanic residents. More than 50 of the Democrats camped out in the nations capital, a move that served to elude arrest and bring national attention to what they described as the need for stronger federal voting rights legislation.
Read more: https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2021/08/17/texas-supreme-court-rules-quorum-breaking-democrats-can-be-arrested-returned-to-house-chamber/
Skittles
(152,967 posts)bunch of partisan HACKS
Polybius
(15,239 posts)From the Texas Constitution:
Section 8. Securing a Quorum When a call of the house is moved for one of the above purposes and seconded by 15 members (of whom the speaker may be one) and ordered by a majority vote, the main entrance to the hall and all other doors leading out of the hall shall be locked and no member permitted to leave the house without the written permission of the speaker. The names of members present shall be recorded. All absentees for whom no sufficient excuse is made may, by order of a majority of those present, be sent for and arrested, wherever they may be found, by the sergeant-at-arms or an officer appointed by the sergeant-at-arms for that purpose, and their attendance shall be secured and retained.
Skittles
(152,967 posts)PROTECTING DEMOCRACY
Response to SouthBayDem (Original post)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
elleng
(130,156 posts)grumpyduck
(6,199 posts)then use it against Republicans who do the same.
NullTuples
(6,017 posts)joshdawg
(2,638 posts)if it were the repubs out, the Texas SC would look the other way, because in Red State Texas, IOKIYAR!
republicans are pus-oozing sores in politics!
Smackdown2019
(1,169 posts)Texas is a blue state, it's just the Republicans district it to their favor and block Democrats from voting.
joshdawg
(2,638 posts)a republican governor, a republican lieutenant governor, a republican attorney general, and a supreme court made up of nothing but republicans, then I would state that Texas is a blood red state.
I should know, I have lived here all my life. 76years.
Smackdown2019
(1,169 posts)Since then, Republican have been putting up roadblocks across the US in voting...
FBaggins
(26,697 posts)Texas used to be solidly blue. That started to change with Reagan and over the next decade or so the state turned reliably red. That Richards election was about the end of the cycle. By '93, both senate seats were red and the state had gone red in four straight presidential elections.
Smackdown2019
(1,169 posts)If we had a true election where everyone was allowed to vote without long lines, issues with their credentials due to their skin OR WHERE THEY LIVE; then it would be a blue state....
It is just a bunch of wannabe cowboys from the "Dallas" episode, that never used a shovel in their life, but knows all on how to dig out a slick trench and fall in it!
FBaggins
(26,697 posts)First - Ignore the "WHERE THEY LIVE" point. Gerrymandering has exactly zero impact on statewide elections. And if you're talking about long lines in heavily blue areas... those races are run by blue counties.
Second - Beto was the closest that we've come to winning statewide in recent TX elections and he lost by almost a quarter of a million votes. There is zero chance that a quarter of a million Democrats were denied the right to vote in TX (let alone the 640k that we lost the state by in last November's presidential election or 1.1 million in the senate race)
This claim is roughly on par with MAGAs thinking that fake ballots were flown in from China to swing the PA elections. If we lost a race by 500 votes, it might be reasonable to wonder about how many people were unable to vote... but a thousand times that many?
FBaggins
(26,697 posts)Texas has shown signs in recent years of moving closer to the center. But it's definitely still a red state.
DetroitLegalBeagle
(1,904 posts)Last edited Tue Aug 17, 2021, 10:26 PM - Edit history (1)
Ignoring the partisan makeup of the Texas Supreme Court, the Texas Constitution uses basically the same language as the US Constitution for compelling absent members.
US Constitution Article 1, Section 3, Clause 1
Texas State Constitution Article 3, Section 10
Congress has used this power in the past as have other states(Oregon is the most recent one I can think of besides Texas).
That being said, just stay out of the state. Texas police have no jurisdiction outside of Texas.
cstanleytech
(26,082 posts)that the police are compelled to obey as neither House has jurisdiction over them.
Just like for example no one in the House or Senate has jurisdiction to give anyone in the military an order.
FBaggins
(26,697 posts)The House sergeant at arms can deputize anyone to arrest them (within the state of course).
An individual police officer could try to make a case that Hey! Youre not the bossa me!. He would lose because the governor is
but he could at least make the case. But the target of the arrest order doesnt have a claim that only the House Sargent at arms can get me
So if the governor were a Democrat, he could decide to tell the police not to exercise the warrant. But the House could use anyone it wanted. They could deputize the local high school football team to do the job.
Traildogbob
(8,584 posts)Fuck you Texans, is the message sent from those you vote for to its citizens. At least theyve ordered some morgue trucks for you. The bed you made, and intend to remain in. What a shit hole country Texas and Florida are.
bluevoter4life
(784 posts)Keep strong Texas Dems.
Response to bluevoter4life (Reply #7)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
orleans
(33,987 posts)sinkingfeeling
(51,279 posts)ripcord
(5,084 posts)Everyone here was cheering in 2019 when Oregon State police were chasing Republicans who chose to deny a quorum. No one was calling Oregon authoritarian for trying to arrest them, people here wanted them dragged into the state Capitol in handcuffs.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I get it... the narratives we set for ourselves, and done at the expense of others, are hard habits to break. Cool allegations, bruh.
AlexSFCA
(6,137 posts)FBaggins
(26,697 posts)This isn't a criminal arrest that would be followed by charges and (if guilty) some sort of punishment.
It's physically restraining someone and dragging them to the legislature... and holding them there until dismissed.
brooklynite
(93,873 posts)
based on Texas and Federal law.
Im not disputing what the Texas House Democrats are doing. But legally speaking, a legislature can compel the attendance of its members. People need to atop reacting emotionally to arrested and understand that it doesnt mean sending them to jail, it means returning them to the legislative chamber to vote on the policy issues before the chamber.
Nb - I suspect youd find that rule existed long before the Republicans took control of the Texas legislature.
ArizonaLib
(1,242 posts)Seems like the same sanctuary kind of thing.
All they have to do is stay out of Texas, as Texas law has no authority outside of Texas.
Texas House members only make a few thousand dollars per year. It's a part-time job and almost all of them have other things that they need to be doing (and that's before we even count being away from their families and communities).
If it were just a week or two - or even a month, that would be one thing. But the governor has the power to call one session after another for as long as he wants to. So "all" they have to do is stay away from their homes/families/careers for... six months? A year?
Of course, but my reply was to the previous comment about possibly seeking refuge in a foreign Embassy in Wash DC.. Certainly, in relative terms, simply staying out of Texas is a far easier alternative than seeking diplomatic asylum in a foreign Embassy.
I appreciate your clarification.
Mr.Bill
(24,104 posts)of California he threatened to do the same thing to republicans that were denying a quorum by staying away. They had not left the state, though, and when Brown gave the command to state police to round them up they voluntarily returned.
turbinetree
(24,632 posts)vote on voting rights legislation today and not tomorrow.....
Fiendish Thingy
(15,369 posts)brooklynite
(93,873 posts)Fiendish Thingy
(15,369 posts)Im assuming it would be US Marshals who would be the ones to transport any TX reps back to Tx?
Not sure how extradition works between DC and the states, but I dont think its a slam dunk that Abbott can forcibly bring them back.
Heres some info:
https://koehlerlaw.net/other-offenses/extradition/
Since the Reps werent in TX at the time the arrest warrants were issued, they might be able to contest extradition successfully. In any case, they can delay for 30 days, if and when they are apprehended.
FBaggins
(26,697 posts)Extradition is a formal process by which someone charged with a crime is delivered from one state to another. This occurs even for petty offenses and even if the crime is not a crime in the state where the fugitive is found.
But there is no crime involved here - so extradition simply doesn't apply.
"Arrest" means simply seizing someone by action of legal authority. That usually happens in the case of a crime and is usually performed by law enforceent, so people naturally associate the two as being related. But really (as above), there's no crime involved here - and it doesn't have to be done by the police. The legislature has the power to seize (or have them seized) a quorum buster and drag the to the floor. So that's an "arrest"... but it isn't at all the same thing as a situation where other states (or the feds) could be asked to help out... and any authority coming from the Texas constitution ends at the Texas border.
Fiendish Thingy
(15,369 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(144,005 posts)FBaggins
(26,697 posts)The state constitution couldnt be clearer. To rule any other way would have been nearly impossible. Nine progressive justices would have ruled in just the same way (though perhaps they would have waited for the lower court to rule first)
cstanleytech
(26,082 posts)of a state are trying to order the police to do something and its no different imo than someone say like Cancun Cruz trying to order someone in the military to shoot someone just because he is a Senator.
Now if the State constitution grants the House the power to order the police to arrest someone then that is one thing but unless it does its a broad overstepping of their powers.
ripcord
(5,084 posts)cstanleytech
(26,082 posts)I thought that the reasons the Republicans were doing it for was shitty.
machoneman
(3,952 posts)FBaggins
(26,697 posts)The Texas constitution couldn't be clearer:
And what are the constitutionally sanctioned manners that the state house has provided?
Every single Democrat voted for the rule.
So what would they be asking the US Supreme Court to do?
They don't have a legal leg to stand on. They may have a moral leg to remain outside the jurisdiction of anyone within the state who might try to arrest them... but they have no legal appeal.
malthaussen
(17,066 posts)brooklynite
(93,873 posts)are you suggesting that Speaker Pelosi is being oppressive by keeping them?
malthaussen
(17,066 posts)I'm suggesting that the idea of forced attendance to a democratic assembly is contradictory. So is fining people for not voting, yet Australia does that. I find the idea paradoxical.
-- Mal
AZLD4Candidate
(5,568 posts)let's see them enforce it."
FBaggins
(26,697 posts)Jackson was pointing out that the SC has no army. The other two branches have to enforce their decisions.
In this case, all three branches agree that the quorum-busting members are subject to being compelled to return. So they absolutely can "enforce it" if the missing members are within Texas.
twodogsbarking
(9,308 posts)Sounds familiar.