UPDATED: Texas AG Paxton asks court to vacate 13 Democrats’ seats in redistricting fight

Paxton said he targeted the 13 lawmakers because they made “incriminating public statements regarding their refusal to return” to Texas. As dozens of Democrats headed out of state Aug. 3, Wu, who leads the Texas House Democratic Caucus, declared that “this corrupt special session is over” and said Democrats were prepared to remain away from Texas through the 30-day special legislative session, which ends Aug. 19.

In an Aug. 8 statement, Bucy said he would “remain steadfast” in his efforts to fight the proposed congressional redistricting plan despite Paxton’s lawsuit.

“This seat belongs to the people of Texas House District 136—not Ken Paxton,” Bucy said. “I am not afraid. I am not backing down.”

Several Texas House Democrats appeared alongside California Democratic leaders during an Aug. 8 news conference in Sacramento. Rep. Ann Johnson, D-Houston, who was not named in Paxton’s Aug. 8 suit, said she thought Texas Republican leaders were "desperate."

“They are throwing everything at us: the loss of leadership, the financial ruin, the threats that they are putting out into the group,” Johnson told reporters Aug. 8. “They are trying to overturn the will of the electorate [and] take out the representatives that are actually standing up against them.”

More details

Paxton’s filing follows a similar lawsuit from Gov. Greg Abbott, who on Aug. 5 asked the Texas Supreme Court to remove Wu from office.

“If representatives are free not to show up whenever they choose, then Texans simply do not have a representative government,” Abbott wrote. “In fact, they don’t have a functioning government at all. This court should make clear that a legislator who does not wish to perform his duties will be stripped of them.”

The court did not immediately rule on Abbott’s suit, giving Wu until 5 p.m. Aug. 8 to file an official response.

In a 32-page response filed Aug. 8, Wu and his lawyers said Texas legislators can only be expelled by their own colleagues, noting that the Texas Supreme Court would have to “violate separation of powers” to remove Wu from office.

“Texas has a long history of quorum-breaking, which the Texas Constitution expressly contemplates and assigns to the legislative branch for enforcement,” the response states. “The petition, for the first time, asks the judiciary to remove an elected member of a co-equal branch.”

The background

The House was originally scheduled to consider the proposal to redraw 37 of Texas’ 38 congressional districts on Aug. 4, but was unable to do so in the absence of a quorum.

Texas Democrats have decried the proposed congressional map as “intentionally racially discriminatory,” arguing that it would split up certain historically Black and Hispanic districts and “dilute” the voting power of minority communities. Republicans have asserted that the map was designed to flip up to five Democratic-held U.S. House seats during the 2026 midterm elections, saying that race was not a factor.

To appear on the March primary ballot, Texas candidates must file by Dec. 8, according to the secretary of state’s office—meaning an updated congressional map would need to be adopted before then.

Asked if House Democrats were planning to stay out of state through the December deadline, Hinojosa told reporters in California that she and her colleagues were “[taking] this fight one day at a time.”

“We fight to win today, and tomorrow we assess,” Hinojosa said.

After dozens of Democrats left the state days earlier to protest a congressional redistricting plan, the Texas House convened at 1 p.m. Aug. 8 and narrowly missed an attendance threshold needed to conduct official business.

The latest

At least two-thirds of the 150-member chamber—known as a quorum—must be present to debate and vote on legislation. Ninety-five House members were present Aug. 8, leaving the body five members short.

House Speaker Dustin Burrows, R-Lubbock, said legislation that would help fund communities’ recovery from the deadly Central Texas floods would be filed Aug. 8; however, it can not be sent to a House committee without a quorum.

“Every hour you remain away is time stolen from those Texans in need,” Burrows said Aug 8. “Each one of you knows that eventually, you will come back and we will pass the priorities of the special session. But with each passing day, the political cost of your absence is rising.”

Burrows also said he would limit absent Democrats’ operating budgets. Burrows and Acting Texas Comptroller Kelly Hancock, a former state senator, announced Aug. 7 that members who “abandon their responsibilities to break quorum” will be required to pick up their paychecks in person. Texas lawmakers are paid $600 per month and receive a daily per diem when the legislature is in session.

“Starting today, to safeguard taxpayer dollars and account for forthcoming liabilities, ... 30% of each quorum-breaking member's monthly operating budget will be reserved and made unavailable for expenditure,” Burrows said.

The House adjourned until 1 p.m. Aug. 11. Burrows said he did not expect members to return until then, unless the Texas Department of Public Safety tracked down enough Democrats to reach a 100-member quorum.

The background

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed suit Aug. 7 in an attempt to force Illinois law enforcement to arrest 33 Texas House Democrats who left the state to stall the redistricting effort. Burrows issued civil arrest warrants for dozens of absent Democrats Aug. 4, although the DPS only has jurisdiction within state lines, according to its website.

Illinois’ Eighth Judicial Circuit Court, which is located about our hours southwest from where Texas lawmakers have been staying in suburban Chicago, had not ruled on Paxton's request as of press time.

“I expect suits in other states will be forthcoming,” Burrows said Aug. 8.

Stay tuned

Paxton has said he will sue to vacate the seats of all House Democrats who remained absent when the chamber convened on Aug. 8. He had not filed lawsuits as of press time.

Gov. Greg Abbott, meanwhile, sued House Democratic Caucus Chair Rep. Gene Wu, D-Houston, on Aug. 5, asking the Texas Supreme Court to remove him from office for “deliberately [fleeing] the state to abandon his official duties indefinitely.” The court did not immediately issue a ruling, instead asking Wu to file an official response to the governor's lawsuit by 5 p.m. Aug. 8.

In an Aug. 5 statement responding to Abbot’s lawsuit, Wu said leaving the state “was not an abandonment of my office; it was a fulfillment of my oath.”

More context

Absent House lawmakers have also been fined $500 each day they break quorum. In his Aug. 5 lawsuit, Abbott contended that lawmakers who are fundraising to cover the fines and other travel costs may be soliciting or accepting bribes.

Quinn Yeargain, a Michigan State University law professor who specializes in states’ constitutional law told Community Impact that to prove lawmakers have accepted bribes, Abbott’s lawyers would have to demonstrate that “the thing of value that the legislators received in any way produced the result.”

“If the argument is that they fled the state to prevent a quorum, then it doesn't make any sense that they can simultaneously argue [that] they did this in exchange for a trip,” Yeargain said in an Aug. 7 interview.

The chamber’s rules state that members who intentionally break quorum or are otherwise “absent without leave for the purpose of impeding the action of the House” can also be censured or expelled from the body by a two-thirds vote, although those motions had not been raised as of press time.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed suit Aug. 7 in an attempt to force Illinois law enforcement to arrest 33 Texas House Democrats who left the state to protest a redistricting effort.

What you need to know

House Speaker Dustin Burrows issued civil arrest warrants for dozens of absent Democrats Aug. 4 after the chamber did not achieve a 100-member quorum, which is the minimum number of members that must be present to vote on legislation.

The warrants directed the House sergeant at arms and state troopers to track members down and bring them to the chamber. The Texas Department of Public Safety has jurisdiction within state lines, according to its website.

Paxton’s lawsuit asks Illinois’ Eighth Judicial Circuit Court to issue an emergency order finding the Democrats “in contempt” for “unlawfully seeking to evade Texas’ duly issued quorum warrants.” The court is located in rural Adams County, about four hours southwest of where Texas lawmakers have been staying in suburban Chicago.

If an order is issued, Illinois law enforcement would be required to arrest the Democrats and return them to Texas, according to the lawsuit. Some Democrats also traveled to New York and Massachusetts, although Paxton did not file in those states Aug. 7.

“The Texas Representatives named herein hope the state of Illinois will provide safe harbor for their political actions and shield them from legal process,” Paxton wrote in the filing. “The United States Constitution, federal statute and the doctrine of comity between states demand otherwise.”

According to the Legal Information Institute at Cornell Law School, “comity” means that state courts should respect the laws or judicial rulings of other states—“not as a matter of obligation but out of deference and mutual respect.”

Paxton cited an Aug. 5 statement from Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, who said at the time that “the rule of law matters” and Texas’ civil warrants “carry no weight in Illinois.” Paxton said that he seeks “enforcement of the rule of law in Illinois.”

“Once again, the attorney general and now the speaker of the Texas House are using the justice system to hunt down their political opponents,” Rep. John Bucy, an Austin Democrat named in the lawsuit, said in an Aug. 7 statement. “If defending democracy is a crime, I’m proud to be an outlaw.”

Earlier on Aug. 7, U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, announced that the Federal Bureau of Investigation would assist Texas law enforcement in locating quorum-breaking Democrats, although he did not share specifics about the FBI’s involvement.

What’s next

The House is scheduled to reconvene at 1 p.m. Aug. 8, which Burrows previously said would give state troopers “some time to work” on arresting the absent Democrats.

“If quorum has been made, we will proceed with the very important business of this state,” Burrows said Aug. 5.

Paxton said Aug. 5 that House lawmakers who do not return to the chamber Aug. 8 will have abandoned their offices, allowing the attorney general’s office to pursue court rulings declaring their seats vacant.

Paxton acknowledged on an Aug. 4 podcast that attempting to vacate Democrats’ seats would not be “an immediate answer.”

“We'd have to go through the court process, and we'd have to file that maybe in districts that are not friendly to Republicans,” he told conservative podcast host Benny Johnson. “It's a challenge because every district would be different. We'd have to go sue in every legislator’s home district to try to execute on that.”

Paxton wrote in the Aug. 7 lawsuit that Texas faces “immediate and irreparable harm” if House Democrats do not return to the state, noting that the legislature cannot pass bills aimed at helping communities recover from the deadly Central Texas floods in their absence. Lawmakers held public hearings on flood-related legislation Aug. 5 and 8, although those hearings were announced after Democrats left the state.

Gov. Greg Abbott, meanwhile, sued House Democratic Caucus Chair Rep. Gene Wu, D-Houston, on Aug. 5, asking the Texas Supreme Court to remove him from office for “deliberately [fleeing] the state to abandon his official duties indefinitely.” The court did not immediately issue a ruling, instead asking Wu to file an official response to the governor's lawsuit by 5 p.m. Aug. 8.

The context

Quinn Yeargain, a Michigan State University law professor who specializes in states’ constitutional law, said Abbott’s petition to vacate Wu’s seat is “extremely unusual [and] unprecedented.”

“They are making a series of arguments that, to my knowledge, have never been made before,” Yeargain told Community Impact in an Aug. 7 interview.

Abbott’s filing does not cite examples of a member of the executive branch expelling a state legislator from office, noting that “there are no prior proceedings in lower courts.”

Yeargain said Abbott’s office would have to prove that Wu “is not entitled to hold office.”

“If the argument is that they have fled the state to prevent quorum, then that reflects an actual intent to continue using their powers,” Yeargain said. “They don't want to relinquish their office—that wouldn't make sense for them to do in this context.”

House Democrats left the state Aug. 3 to halt a planned vote on the congressional redistricting proposal, which was set for Aug. 4. Abbott filed suit against Wu on Aug. 5.

In a statement responding to the lawsuit, Wu said leaving the state “was not an abandonment of my office; it was a fulfillment of my oath.”

As Democrats headed out of state Aug. 3, Wu declared that “this corrupt special session is over” and said he and his colleagues were prepared to remain away from Texas through the 30-day special legislative session, which ends Aug. 19.

Abbott argued that because Wu “deliberately fled the state to abandon his official duties indefinitely,” he abandoned his office and his seat should be vacated.

In a nonbinding 2021 opinion, issued after Texas Democrats broke quorum to fight an election bill, Paxton cited an 1873 abandonment of office case, in which a Texas court found that “the failure to perform the duties pertaining to the office must be with actual or imputed intention on the part of the officer to abandon and relinquish the office.”

Yeargain said that “there's nothing in the [Texas] Constitution that demands, or even requires” that a lawmaker’s office be vacated after they break quorum. In 2021, Chief Supreme Court Justice Jimmy Blacklock wrote that the Texas Constitution allows lawmakers to break quorum and also “gives the House of Representatives the authority to physically compel the attendance of absent members.” The opinion does not address abandonment of office.

One more thing

Meanwhile, the Texas Senate is set to vote on the congressional redistricting plan in the coming days, after it was approved by a Senate committee Aug. 7. Dozens of Texans told the committee they were concerned the proposed map would break up communities and “dilute” minorities’ voting power. Texas Republicans have said that race was not a factor when drawing the proposed map, which is designed to “elect more Republicans to the U.S. Congress.”

“All the testimony that's been suggesting that this map was drawn on a racial basis is inaccurate and incorrect,” Senate redistricting chair Sen. Phil King, R-Weatherford, said Aug. 7. “So I'm disregarding that part of the testimony, because I didn't take race into account, and I don't see race in this map.”