A press release from the Texas Attorney General: Attor­ney Gen­er­al Ken Pax­ton Sues Five Cities Over Mar­i­jua­na Poli­cies Pre­vent­ing Enforce­ment of Texas Drug Laws

The state intends to clamp down on cities that are lenient on marijuana possession.

- Click here for it.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has launched lawsuits against the cities of Austin, San Marcos, Killeen, Elgin, and Denton for adopting amnesty and non-prosecution policies that violate Texas laws concerning marijuana possession and distribution.

The five municipalities adopted ordinances or policies instructing police not to enforce Texas drug laws concerning possession and distribution of marijuana—an illicit substance that psychologists have increasingly linked to psychosis and other negative consequences. Texas Local Government Code forbids any political subdivision from adopting “a policy under which the entity will not fully enforce laws relating to drugs.” Further, the Texas Constitution notes that it is unlawful for municipalities to adopt ordinances that are inconsistent with the laws enacted by the Texas Legislature (Article 9, Section 5).

From the Texas Tribune: Judge orders Ken Paxton trial moved out of Collin County and delayed

For 2306, and our look at the executive and judicial branches - and the criminal justice system.

- Click here for the article.

The judge in the securities fraud case against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has ruled that the trial should be moved out of Collin County and delayed.

The ruling to change venue is a major victory for prosecutors, who had argued Paxton and his allies had tainted the jury pool in Collin County, where he lives.

Judge George Gallagher said the trial, initially scheduled for May 1, will now be postponed until a new venue is determined.
Gallagher on Thursday denied two other motions: to dismiss the case and to delay it until prosecutors can get paid.

Paxton is accused of misleading investors in a company from before his time as attorney general, a legal saga that began more than a year ago. He recently beat a federal, civil case involving similar allegations, but the state charges remain — and they are more serious, carrying a potential prison sentence of up to 99 years.

Gallagher's ruling on the venue is somewhat surprising. Weeks ago, Gallagher had signaled that he had wanted to at least try to move forward with the case in Collin County, where jury selection had been set to begin in a few weeks.

In court, prosecutors had sought to show collusion among Paxton, his team and his supporters aimed at creating a sympathetic jury pool. Paxton's lawyers had argued they had no ties to the alleged effort and that it wasn't affecting public opinion even if it existed.

The Texas Attorney General in the news

Both form the Texas Tribune:

- Texas Attorney General first in country to file brief backing Trump travel ban.

Attorney General Ken Paxton issued an amicus brief Wednesday expressing his support of President Donald Trump's travel ban, effectively becoming the first state attorney general to back the controversial executive order.

Under the executive order, travelers from Syria, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia and Libya are barred from entering the United States for the next 90 days. Last month, the ban immediately created chaotic scenes in major airports across the country, where refugees in transit were detained.

“The law makes it very clear that the president has discretion to protect the safety of the American people and our nation’s institutions with respect to who can come into this country,” Paxton said in a news release. “The safety of the American people and the security of our country are President Trump’s major responsibilities under the law.”

Last week, a three judge panel from the 9th Circuit Court upheld a temporary restraining order which blocked parts of the order. In his brief, Paxton said the "president’s immigration order is a lawful exercise of congressionally delegated executive power over foreign affairs and national security."

- Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton hangs on politically as criminal trial looms.

That case has now dogged Paxton for over 18 months, hanging over most of his first term as Texas' attorney general. And yet, for all the rancor, Paxton appears to be surviving politically, a reality reflected here Monday night as he spoke to the NE Tarrant Tea Party, trumpeting his past legal victories over former President Barack Obama, looking forward to the Donald Trump era fully ramping up — and yes, addressing what one questioner delicately referred to as "your case."

The public's curiosity over Paxton's legal situation is sure to only increase — both inside and outside rooms like the one he addressed Monday night. In less than three months, Texans will watch as their attorney general stands trial on securities fraud charges, facing up to 99 years in prison. For many, it will be the first time they have heard in any detail about the allegation that Paxton misled investors in a company from before his time as attorney general.

The case goes back to August 2015, when a Collin County grand jury indicted Paxton on two counts of first-degree securities fraud and one count of third-degree failure to register with the state securities board. The most serious allegation is that Paxton, while a state representative, duped the investors in the company, a McKinney technology startup called Servergy, by failing to disclose he was making a commission. The U.S. Securities Exchange Commission brought a similar, civil case against Paxton in April 2016, and while a federal judge dismissed those charges in October, the SEC has kept the case alive by filing amended allegations.

Paxton and his allies have increasingly argued in recent months that he is the subject of a revenge plot by political foes he made before — and during — the 2014 attorney general's race. It's a theory that many of his supporters have also adopted — and could be key to his prevailing in at least the court of public opinion.

From the Texas Tribune: Paxton Blasts Clean Power Plan Ahead of High-Profile Legal Arguments

More conflict between Texas and the EPA.

- Click here for the article.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on Monday accused the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency of trying to “force Texas to change how we regulate energy production,” through what he called an “unprecedented expansion of federal authority.”

“What we need is more reliable energy — not less, and the EPA is trying to stop that,” the Republican said while appearing on a panel in Washington, D.C.

Paxton specifically targeted the Clean Power Plan, President Obama’s state-by-state effort to fight climate change by shifting away from coal power to cleaner-burning natural gas and renewable resources.

His appearance on the panel, organized by the conservative Texas Public Policy Foundation, came one day before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is to hear four hours of oral arguments over the carbon dioxide-cutting rule. Those watching the litigation say the outcome could make or break Obama’s legacy on climate change.

Mentioned in the article:

- The EPA.
- The Clean Power Plan.
- Texas Public Policy Foundation.
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
- Environment Texas- Brattle Group
- Texas Clean Energy Coalition.
The case being considered by the DC court is State of West Virginia v EPA.

From the Texas Tribune: Texas Appeals Voter ID Rulings to U.S. Supreme Court

For our look at federalism, as well as voting rights.

- Click here for the article.

Texas wants to take its voter identification battle to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on Friday asked the justices to hear his arguments about why the state’s photo ID requirements for voting do not discriminate against Hispanics and African-American voters.

“Safeguarding the integrity of our elections is essential to preserving our democracy,” the Republican said in a statement. "Texas enacted a common-sense voter ID law and I am confident that the U.S. Supreme Court will ultimately reinstate it.”

Texas officials say the voter ID law bolsters the integrity of elections by preventing voter fraud, which Gov. Greg Abbott has called "rampant." But the U.S. Department of Justice and other plaintiffs — backed by court rulings — have pointed out that in-person voter fraud is incredibly rare.

In July, U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed lower court rulings that the 2011 law, considered the nation’s strictest, violates the federal Voting Rights Act. In a 9-6 ruling, the conservative court agreed that narrowly tailored requirements disproportionately affected minority voters — those who were less likely to hold one of seven types of photo ID. Those include: a state driver's license or ID card, a concealed handgun license, a U.S. passport, a military ID card, a U.S citizenship certificate or an election identification certificate.

Experts have testified that more than 600,000 Texans lack such identification, though not all of them have necessarily tried to vote.

Paxton is appealing to a Supreme Court that still has just eight members, following the February death of Justice Antonin Scalia. If the justices agree to hear the case — and if they do so without a replacement for Scalia — Paxton would need five votes to overturn the appeals court ruling. A 4-4 split would allow it to stand.

From the Texas Tribune: Paxton Opinion Slams Schools' Transgender Policies

Doing what he is constitutionally authorized to do.

A great example of conflict between the three levels of government.

- Click here for the article.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on Tuesday issued an opinion saying the Fort Worth school superintendent who made headlines for formulating guidelines to accommodate transgender students exceeded his authority. Paxton also said that a portion of the guidelines instructing district employees not to out transgender students to their parents might violate state law.

Citing a part of the Texas education code, Paxton wrote that school district boards of trustees — not superintendents — are required to adopt policies while superintendents can only implement those policies “by developing administrative regulations.”
Attorney general opinions are not legally binding, and Paxton's interpretation has no direct legal impact on the Fort Worth district.

The Fort Worth ISD guidelines are in line with a directive from the Obama administration — issued after the guidelines were adopted — that instructed school districts across the country to ensure that transgender students are not discriminated against. Republican Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick requested the opinion three weeks after calling for Fort Worth ISD Superintendent Kent Scribner’s resignation.

From the Texas Tribune: Analysis: A Friend With a Check is a Friend Indeed

What is the difference between a contribution and a bribe?

- Click here for the article.

If it's legal to give money to a state officeholder without violating Texas bribery laws — as is apparently the case with gifts reported by Attorney General Ken Paxtonfor use in his legal defense — what keeps rich folks from sprinkling money on their favorite public officials?

It’s not really a question about the attorney general, even if he’s the one who raised the point for conversation. In his most recent personal financial disclosure — a report required of elected state officials — Paxton brought to light an idiosyncrasy in Texas ethics law.

“$100,000 gift for legal defense from family friend who meets independent relationship exception,” Paxton reported in an entry noting money received from James Webb of Frisco. That was the largest of two dozen such gifts totaling $329,050.

Paxton’s fundraising hasn’t raised any legal objections outside of the usual partisan noise. He’s the poster boy in this not because of the way he’s paying his lawyers but because he has lawyers to pay. Paxton is facing federal and state securities fraud charges related to his work as a private attorney and businessman and not to his state job.

Paxton is fighting indictments on allegations that he was steering people to investments without revealing he was being paid to do so. He also faces related federal civil fraud chargesfrom the Securities and Exchange Commission. He and his lawyers contend the charges are politically motivated and have no merit.

The Tidelands Controversy

The chapter on the Texas Attorney General mentions this controversy, and the role then Attorney General Price Daniels, Sr. played in arguing Texas' side of the case. In case you want more on it:

- TSHA: Tidelands Controversy.

And for more - cause why not?

- TSHA: Price Daniels, Sr.

From the Office of the Texas Attorney General

For discussion in 2306:

- The Texas Attorney General v the U.S.A.

And while we are on the subject, here is the TSHA's description of the office:

- Click here.

As the chief legal officer of the state of Texas, the attorney general protects state interests through judicial proceedings and legal advice. His constitutional authority is broad but briefly stated, and the Texas legislature and the courts may augment his official powers. Whenever the interests of Texas state government are involved in civil law, the attorney general must represent and defend those interests. The state of Texas is represented by the attorney general in the courts of Texas and of the United States. The office influences all Texas government agencies through its advisory-opinion function, whereby the attorney general provides specified officials with guidance on how to perform their duties legally.

The attorney general works with governmental agencies in a variety of functions, such as assisting the secretary of state and the governor in extradition proceedings, approving the form of official papers, appearing before grand juries in an informational capacity, initiating inquiries into suspected illegal activities, examining the legality of bond issues for state and local governments, and preparing legal instruments for state agencies. The attorney general has regulatory or punitive civil powers over corporations and must protect charitable trusts through court action. Taxation and property are two functional areas significant to the work of the attorney general; the attorney general sues for recovery of taxes owed the state of Texas and protects the public interest with respect to abandoned property that escheats to the state. The attorney general acts against persons or corporations violating the environmental-protection laws of Texas or illegally extracting natural resources. The office also enforces the state's antitrust laws and prosecutes persons who mishandle state funds.

From the Houston Chronicle: Local governments under fire for gun bans

File this one under policy implementation. It also fits under a general discussion of the relationship between state and local governments, in addition to the role of the Texas Attorney General in adjudicating disputes. The struggle over where someone can and cannot openly carry a handgun continues.

- Click here for the article.

Senate Bill 273, which went into effect Sept. 1, allows anyone to file a complaint with the attorney general's office if he believes a state agency or political subdivision is improperly posting the signs where guns are allowed.

Under the law, the complainant first must send a written complaint to the entity. If three days go by without a response, he can file a complaint with Paxton's office. The attorney general then investigates the allegation - which must include proof of the improper signage and lack of local response - and forwards it to the appropriate division if further action needs to be taken.

Governmental entities found in violation of the law have 15 days to remedy the situation; if they do not, Paxton's office can sue, seeking penalties of up to $1,500 for the first day and $10,500 for each subsequent day they are deemed non-compliant. The new law applies only to signs that bar gun owners with a license to carry, or LTC, "from entering or remaining on a premises or other place owned or leased by the governmental entity." As of Jan. 1, those with an LTC are allowed to carry their handguns openly in a shoulder or hip holster.

The complaints received by Paxton's office since Sept. 1 target a variety of entities, from the Deer Park Community Center to the Dallas Zoo.

Nearly a quarter of the complaints were filed against city halls and other government complexes where signs were posted telling Texans they could not carry handguns anywhere in their buildings. Six were filed against local governmental entities that want to ban guns in their entire courthouse or judicial complexes, and three were lodged against county appraisal districts or tax offices.

For 2306 - some random items

Some random items about Texas government:

- Ross Ramsey looks at down ballot races in the upcoming Texas Primary and wonders what will impact results in these low information races. People know little about presidential candidates, even less about state and local ones.

- The Texas Tribune reports that the Trump campaign lost one Texas state campaign director, but quickly got another. Here's Trump's press release announcing the change.

- A grand jury is investigating a land deal involving the Texas Attorney General. He's already being investigated for possible securities fraud.

- Ex-Governor Rick Perry has been hired to help a Florida dental insurance company obtain business through the state's Medicaid program. Reports show that the company had donated money to previous campaigns and one of the officers in the company had been appointed by Perry to head the Texas Health and Human Services Commission.

From KRGV.com: Texas AG: Board Can't Control Local Textbook Adoption AG: Board only has powers "specifically delegated by statute."

I'm hunting around for stories using which refer to the "delegated," "reserved," and "implied" - among the other types we went over this semester - and ran across this that mentions Texas Attorney General and his decision that existing state laws limits the State Board of Education's effort to restrict what textbooks local districts can use in the classroom.

2305 students especially should be prepped to answer questions using that terminology and what relative powers the national, state, and local governments have and why.

2306 students might want to have an understanding of the Attorney General's office and the basic structure of the SBOE.

Note use of the term "rulemaking" in the story and the conflict it contains between the legislature and the executive branch. The Texas Legislature is attempting to curtail the power of the SBOE, which seem to push back.

- Click here for the story.

The Texas attorney general said Friday that the Board of Education can't tell local school districts what textbooks to adopt for their classrooms, interpreting existing state law as limiting the often controversial board's authority.

Republican Ken Paxton stated in an opinion that the board has only those powers "specifically delegated by statute" and that it "may not substitute its judgment for the lawful exercise of those powers and duties by the trustees."

The board's 15 members sanction textbooks for use statewide in a process that has for years been marred by ideological fights over lessons on subjects including evolution, climate change and the influence of biblical figures such as Moses on America's Founding Fathers. Texas has 5.2 million public school students, a textbook market so large that edits made for the board can affect what's published in other states.

But, in 2011, the Legislature approved a law giving school districts the option of adopting classroom materials that haven't won board approval. Relatively few school districts have taken advantage, though the use of iPads and e-readers makes it easier for publishers to tailor books to individual buyers' needs.

Still, Republican board member Barbara Cargill sought clarification on where the 2011 law and others left the board's authority over school districts' textbook approval processes. She said the state board's approval process is done publicly and ensures that textbooks meet state curriculum standards. She said she was worried that local adoption of classroom materials could undermine that.

"I seek to identify the extent of the board's rulemaking authority to ensure that, at the local level, appropriate process and safeguards exist with regard to the adoption and use of instructional materials by a public school," she wrote when asking for the attorney general's opinion in June.

County Clerks are in the news

Obviously the reason is that some are claiming that issuing same sex marriage licenses violates their religious beliefs, and the legal questions that raises. The national government is telling them to do one thing - the state government is trying to give them cover to not do it.

I'll provide some detail on the position since its suddenly topical, but to catch up on the specifics of the controversy, click on these:

- Texas AG tells clerks they can flout Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage.
- Court clerks can't take licenses with their duties.
- There Are Still at Least 60 Texas Counties Not Issuing Same-Sex Marriage Licenses.
- Gay Couple to Sue Hood County Clerk Over Marriage License.
- Texas county clerks felt betrayed by Texas leaders on gay marriage, emails show.
- 5th Circuit tells courts to issue same-sex marriage rulings.
- Gay Marriage Issue Roils Texas Town.

Statewide officials in Texas push back against the gay marriage decision - but seem to accept that it is here to stay

As 2306 students learned - the state of Texas delegates the handling of the bulk of its paperwork to the counties, much of this is handled by the county clerk's office. This includes the processing of marriage licenses, which now have to be open to same-sex couples in addition to opposite sex couples.

State officials have written rules providing opportunities for clerks to not due so if they argue that this conflicts with their religious convictions.

A few items along those lines:

- Paxton: County clerks may refuse — on religious grounds — to issue same-sex marriage licenses.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican social conservative, offered at least moral support Sunday for county clerks and their employees who feel their religious beliefs dictate that they decline to issue same-sex marriage licenses.

In a nonbinding legal opinion, Paxton said religious freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment “may allow accommodation of their religious objections to issuing same-sex marriage licenses.”

The clerks who balk at licensing gay marriage “may well face litigation and/or a fine,” Paxton warned.

“Importantly, the strength of any particular religious accommodation claim depends on the particular facts of each case,” he concluded.

“But,” he added in a press release, “numerous lawyers stand ready to assist clerks defending their religious beliefs, in many cases on a pro-bono basis, and I will do everything I can from this office to be a public voice for those standing in defense of their rights.”

- Can a Texas county clerk refuse to issue a gay marriage license? It’s complicated.

. . . For an accommodation to be made, certain questions arise. "Is their religious belief substantially burdened?" Robson asked. "Is it overridden by their status as a public employee? Where is that line? Because as a public employee, you swear to uphold the Constitution." Public employees "don't have full 1st Amendment rights," she said, "because it's balanced against the interest of their employer, which in this case is the government." 

What's not allowed, in Robson's estimation, is for a clerk to shut down the issuance of licenses across the board over a personal objection. "The question in terms of accommodation has to do with individuals," Robson said. "So if the entire courthouse closed, that would not be an accommodation."

- First same-sex marriage licenses issued in Brazoria County.

After an opinion from the District Attorney's office this afternoon, County Clerk Joyce Hudman said Brazoria County is officially issuing same-sex marriage licenses. Hudman said her offices have been issuing licenses since 1:30 p.m. and will throughout the day.

District Attorney Jeri Yenne gave the county clerk's office a one-sentence opinion that issuing same-sex marriage licenses is mandatory based on the Supreme Court's decision today.

"As a follow-up to your inquiry regarding marriage licenses, please be advised that on today's date, the Supreme Court of the United States issued an opinion indicating the Fourteenth Amendment requires a state to license a marriage between two people of the same sex," Yenne's memo reads.

Attorney General Abbott will appeal yesterday's federal rule overturning the state's ban on gay marriage

This was to be expected.

Politico provides detail:

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, a Republican running for governor, will appeal a Wednesday ruling striking down the Lone Star State’s ban on gay marriage.

In a statement, Abbott announced that same-sex marriage is “an issue that will ultimately be resolved by a higher court. Texas will begin that process by appealing today’s ruling to the Fifth Circuit.”

“The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled over and over again that states have the authority to define and regulate marriage,” said Abbott, who is set to face off with Democratic state Sen. Wendy Davis in the deep-red state. “The Texas Constitution defines marriage as between one man and one woman. If the Fifth Circuit honors those precedents, then today’s decision should be overturned and the Texas Constitution will be upheld.”

His comments came after a ruling earlier in the day from a federal judge in Austin.

“This is an issue on which there are good, well-meaning people on both sides,” Abbott said.

The last remarks seems telling to me - an increasing group of Republicans seem to believe (1) that acceptance of gay marriage is growing among Republicans so they may have to prepare ground work for a switch on the issue, and (2) the courts will mandate this change anyway so it might be worth getting ahead of it. Having the court overturn Texas laws - including part of the Texas Constitution - relieves Texas of the political dirty work associated with changing it. It takes it off their hands - which simultaneously gets rid of the issue and gives them a target to blame for the change.

Greg Abbott intervenes in Kountze cheerleader case

We discussed this case in class so we saw it coming. From the Texas Tribune:

The state of Texas, known for its frequent legal scuffles with the federal government, has picked yet another high-profile courtroom fight.

This time, though, the case centers on one of the state's own school districts, Kountze ISD, which last month ordered high school cheerleaders to stop holding banners bearing Bible verses during football games.

Attorney General Greg Abbott announced Wednesday at a press conference with Gov. Rick Perry that the state had filed a motion to intervene in a suit challenging the order, which the district imposed after it received a letter from the Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation calling the display of the verses unconstitutional.

Texas AG wins court decision on registration rules

After a couple significant loses, the Texas AG won a court ruling allowing the state to proceed with a rule regulating third party voter registration activities.

From the FWST:

Texas can enforce its law regulating third-party voter registration activities while a court ruling blocking the measure is on appeal.


The U.S. Court of Appeals in New Orleans on Thursday granted a request by Texas to put on hold last month's court order barring enforcement of several provisions of the 2011 law. U.S. District Judge Gregg Costa determined that the law probably conflicted with federal rules and the U.S. Constitution.

The stay will allow enforcement of the 2011 law pending the appeal, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said.
A Federal District court had previously granted an infunction against enforcing the law:

U.S. District Judge Gregg Costa of Galveston ruled that a law that prohibits third-party voter registrars from working in more than one county and another that mandates registrars in Texas be residents of the state violate the First Amendment.

“During the 2011 legislative session, the Governor signed two bills that imposed a number of additional requirements,” Costa wrote in his 94-page opinion. “The result is that Texas now imposes more burdensome regulations on those engaging in third-party voter registration than the vast majority of, if not all, other states.”

The judge also struck down provisions that required deputy voter registrars be paid hourly, that prevented registration certificates from being photocopied and that prohibited completed forms from being mailed in to elections officials. A final judgment must still be rendered, Costa declared. Until then, the laws cannot be enforced.

The suit was filed in February against Texas Secretary of State Hope Andrade’s office by Voting for America Inc., the voter registration affiliate of Project Vote, a national nonprofit voter education and advocacy organization.
Click here for the opinion.

The Texas AG had been seeking to overturn the injunction for sometime. The story points out that this change in voting rules had been precleared.

Groups opposed to the law are now seeking to take their complaint to the Supreme Court.

From the Houston Chronicle: Texas spends big bucks suing federal government

Texas Attorney General has been racking up bills suing the national government:

The Texas attorney general's office has filed 24 lawsuits against the federal government since Obama took office — litigation that has cost the state $2.58 million and more than 14,113 hours spent by staff and state lawyers working those cases.

Many of those have resulted in defeats, including the recent high-profile lawsuits defending Texas' strict law requiring voters to show picture ID at the polls and the new state-approved voting districts that a federal appeals court ruled were discriminatory toward minorities. Those two cases alone cost more than $2 million, according to records obtained by The Associated Press using the Freedom of Information Act.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said the costs are worth it, calling the litigation "a fight against the unprecedented ideology coming from the Obama administration." In an interview, he said the legal battles he wages are meant to promote industry and protect Texas jobs.

Texas Attorney General Challenges Voter ID Ruling

Texas continues to challenge the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which makes Texas and a handful of other states, present redistricting and election law changes to the federal government for approval prior to being implemented. This is due to Texas' history of discriminatory actions. Some argue this requirement is no longer necessary. Minority groups disagree.

From the Austin American-Statesman:

Attorney General Greg Abbott on Wednesday made a direct constitutional challenge to a piece of the historic Voting Rights Act of 1965, which singles out Texas and several other states.

Abbott took aim at a section of the act that requires Texas and several other states, mostly in the South, that have histories of discrimination to "pre-clear" any changes to election laws. Abbott seems to be using the U.S Department of Justice's recent denial of pre-clearance of the Legislature's controversial voter ID law, which would require voters to present a valid form of photo identification before casting ballots, as a way to try to change the larger decades-old requirement.

"For the Department of Justice to now contend that Texas cannot implement its voter ID law denies Texas the ability to do what other states can rightfully exercise under the Constitution," Abbott, a Republican, said in a statement.

Richard Hasen, an elections law professor at the University of California, Irvine, said Abbott's move could represent a dramatic shift in election law for Texas and all other states in the country. "That ups the ante," he said.