Primary Picks, Part III: Judicial Races and Propositions

This is the third post of three going through our extraordinarily long ballot. In Part I we went through statewide races. In Part II we covered Congressional and County races.

Here in Part III, we’ll be covering just the contested Primary judicial races, starting at the statewide level.

As a reminder, Texas has a two-part Supreme Court. One part is called the Supreme Court; it handles civil law cases. The other is called the Court of Criminal Appeals, which is the Supreme Court level in Texas for criminal cases.

Texas Court System diagram found on Judge Scott Walker's website

Supreme Court, Place 9

The choices are David J. Schenck and Evan Young. Young has the endorsements of Conservative Coalition of Harris County (with 83% of their vote), my SREC committeewoman Deborah Fite, and Texas Home School Coalition. I took a look at Houston Region Business Coalition, The LinkLetter, and Texas Conservative Review; all three went with Evan Young.

Texas Right to Life supports David Schenck, as do Texas Eagle Forum, True Texas Project, and Grassroots America. He has been on the 5^th Circuit Court of Appeals (that’s the Texas 5^th Circuit). He claims to be a strict constructionist. But I’m unaware of any reason to particularly challenge a Republican incumbent who seems to be doing well.

Evan Young was appointed to this position on the Texas Supreme Court by Governor Abbott, so he’s the incumbent. I’m unaware of complaints about Young. He has videos on his website from his swearing in ceremony, and he sounds like a constitutionalist. He clerked for Antonin Scalia. His wife, by the way, clerked for Neil Gorsuch.

I’m going to take the word of so many and give Evan Young my vote.

 

Court of Criminal Appeals, Place 5

The choices are Scott Walker and Clint Morgan.

Scott Walker was elected to this position, winning handily. If there’s reason to oust an incumbent, it had better be good. Clint Morgan is not afraid to take on his opponent directly; he lays out some stats on his website that are pretty convincing. Walker lacks credentials and productivity by comparison to Morgan. But then Morgan shows a couple more graphs. One compares Walker to all other appellate judges elected since 1992 who have served 5 years or more; Walker underperforms all of them, by quite a lot. Since his election, most judges have ruled on 35-50 cases, one as high as 60. Walker has ruled on only 18. Morgan’s website claims, “Scott Walker is the least productive judge in the recorded history of the Court.” He also notes that Walker, a former defense attorney, leans toward leniency. You might need to look case-by-case to know whether that assessment is accurate. Morgan is a prosecutor, and a very productive one, from here in Harris County.

comparison chart from Clint Morgan's website

Before taking a look, I would have thought there wasn’t reason to go against an incumbent. But Morgan has the practically unanimous support of all the endorsement lists I look at, including Texas Right to Life. CCHC gave him 100% support. Deborah Fite, my SREC committeewoman, added a comment only on this race, saying, “This race may be the most important on ballot.” Walker lists no endorsements on his website, and I didn’t find any. I’ll be voting for Clint Morgan.

 

County District Judicial Races

Note that, with Democrat sweeps the past two elections, the only Republican judges are appointed ones. There aren’t any Republican judges being challenged in the Primary. And there are only a few races in which there are multiple Republicans running. Those are the only ones I’ll cover here.

 

Family District Judge, 308^th Judicial District

The choices are Todd Frankfort and Michael Patrick Delaney.

I am told by another lawyer who is also running for a judge position that Todd Frankfort is one of the best around, excellent. He’s board certified. And he has a good judicial temperament. According to his website, he “has been selected as a ‘Super Lawyer’ every year since 2012, received the Houston Bar Association ‘President’s Award’ for outstanding service in 2004 and 2012, and received the Houston Bar Association ‘Merit Award’ in 2003.” He has the endorsements from the LINKLetter, Texas Conservative Review, Houston Region Business Coalition, and my SREC representative.

Delaney has been a family law attorney for 26 years in private practice. His website mentions no endorsements, and I found only a 67% vote (not enough for an endorsement) from the Conservative Coalition of Harris County.

Frankfort looks to me like the better pick.

 

Family District Judge, 311^th Judicial District

The two candidates are Gardner Eastland and Ray VanNorman. Many significant endorsements go to Ray VanNorman: CCHC (100% endorsement), Texas Right to Life, Texas Home School Coalition, Texas Conservative Review, my SREC committeewoman. He has strong conservative credentials.

Gardner Eastland has fewer endorsements: Houston Region Business Coalition, BIZPAC, and C Club.

However, when I talked with a lawyer friend, he pointed out that VanNorman lacks experience in the area of family law. On Eastland’swebsite he says, “My Republican opponent has never handled a divorce in Harris County, Texas. In fact, he has never filed a lawsuit of any kind with the Harris County District Clerk’s Office.” Eastland has handled over 500 family law cases in Harris County.

Family law is an area where experience gives better results to families. A wrong decision can ruin lives, maybe for generations.

I feel odd going against the conservative majority here. I think VanNorman must be truly conservative. Maybe civil law would be a better fit for him. But on this one I’m going with the experienced candidate, Gardner Eastland.

 

Family District Judge, 313^th Judicial District

The two candidates are Julie A. Ketterman and Rachel Leal-Hudson, I think.

This race is confusing to me. By the time I got ready to study the race, it looked like this was over. Ketterman had filed suit, saying Leal-Hudson lacked the minimum 250 signatures. Most judicial candidates, by the way, got over 750 signatures, which allowed them to waive the filing fee. Leal-Hudson, I’m told, got into the race late and missed all the signature signing parties. There was a jury trial. Leal-Hudson lost. That meant that, even though the ballot would have her name on it, votes cast for her would not count.

That’s what I thought almost two weeks ago. But since then I continue to get campaign emails. I got a mailer a couple of days ago—those aren’t cheap. And endorsements continue to come in.

I looked up the case. The jury found for the plaintiff, February 4. However, there’s a note that says an appeal has been filed.

I don’t know what to do with this information. Leal-Hudson has endorsements from THSC, CCHC (100%), Deborah Fite, LINKLetter, Texas Conservative Review, HRBC, Rep. Briscoe Cain, PoliceInc, Houston Police Officers Union, and Kingwood Tea Party.

Kettering has 22 years of experience in family and CPS law, and has taught courses on the subject. Leal-Hudson has 11 years of experience in family and CPS law, plus the addition of being the oldest of 19 adopted children, so she has a lot of first-hand experience as well.

I don’t know how to decide this. If there were no court case, I’d probably be swayed by the outpouring of support going for Leal-Hudson. Ketterman didn’t answer the questionnaire for CCHC, so I couldn’t learn more about her. I may go ahead and vote Rachel Leal-Hudson, trusting those who have vetted her, and hope that the court case is resolved appropriately.

 

Justice of the Peace, Precinct 5, Place 2

The candidates are Zee Adam Gire, Bret S. Kisluk, and Bob Wolfe. Bret Kisluk spoke to our Tea Party and was impressive (video here). I haven’t met the others.

Gire is a businessman, not a lawyer. A law degree isn’t required for the job, but understanding of the law would sure help. He has a couple of precinct chair endorsements. Wolfe got the LINKLetter endorsement. Kisluk has endorsements from CCHC (92%), Texas Conservative Review, Houston Region Business Coalition, and my SREC Committeewoman.

I read their questionnaire answers for CCHC.  Gire was unaware that the Justice of the Peace doesn’t do criminal cases (see answer 13). It looks like there would be a steep learning curve.

Norman Rockwell's "Marriage License"

I try not to judge too harshly on grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors, because most people need someone like me to clean up their writing. (Even I could use such a person from time to time.) But Wolfe’s questionnaire answers were remarkably error-filled, enough to be a serious distraction. It says to me that this person doesn’t handle details well. Wolfe also seems to think it’s wrong for Justices of the Peace to spend their time performing weddings. But—the single thing most of us know that JPs do is marriages. There’s a Normal Rockwell painting of a couple going before the JP. He’s an attorney, but he doesn’t have judicial experience.

Kisluk is a part-time municipal judge in three jurisdictions. He knows the law, and he knows how to handle a court docket with proven efficiency. Wolfe brought up that he spends too much time performing marriages, supposedly for the extra money (again, it’s what JPs do) and has even done same-sex weddings. While I would prefer that he didn’t, the law requires that someone be available to do it. I think we would be happy with Kisluk as Justice of the Peace; I’m voting for him.

 

Propositions

These are put forth by the SREC Committee, the two committee members from each senatorial district representing that district at the state level. The propositions, even if approved by the vote, are non-binding. They do not become law. They are intended to direct the next legislative session on issues and policies of importance.

I trust the SREC as a whole. But, as with any legislative body, they are made up of a fairly diverse membership representing different interests and points of view. You do not need to feel required to agree with all these. You might even want to start from the position: convince me to vote for this.

So, I’ll just go through the list and give my impressions. Take it for what it’s worth. Do your own thinking. The numbers after the title are the SREC members voting for, against, or not voting; there are 62 SREC members plus a chair and vice chair who don’t typically vote.

 

Proposition 1: Border Security (61-0-2)

In light of the federal government’s refusal to defend the southern border, Texas should immediately deploy the National Guard, Texas Military Forces, and necessary state law enforcement to seal the border, enforce immigration laws, and deport illegal aliens.

 

This is already taking place. At our expense. I’d like to see a way to get the federal government to pay us back for doing its job. But no one has yet to come up with a way. I’ve offered an idea—have all income tax earned in Texas to go through a sort of escrow account handled by the state of Texas, from which we extract what the federal government should not be collecting; and then we pass along the appropriate remainder. But maybe there’s not a legal way to accomplish it. Anyway, I’m voting YES.

 

 

Proposition 2: Eliminate Property Tax (57-3-3)

Texas should eliminate all property taxes within ten (10) years without implementing a state income tax.

 

Son Political Sphere is absolutely against this; he doesn’t believe this plan—particularly Huffine’s would be anything but extraordinarily unfair to everyone. Do the math. I have heard from people who actually had to move because they couldn’t afford the property taxes on their life-long home that they had paid off. That’s just wrong. So I’m willing to look at alternatives. But, unlike many friends, I’m going to vote NO on this until I can see a plan I feel better about.

 

 

Proposition 3: Vaccine Mandate (61-1-0)

Texans should not lose their job nor students be penalized for declining a COVID-19 vaccine. 

 

This is an obvious YES. Coercion is wrong, which we determined in the Nuremberg Code of 1947.

 

 

Proposition 4: Parents’ Rights and Critical Race Theory (60-0-1)

Texas schools should teach students basic knowledge and American exceptionalism and reject Critical Race Theory and other curricula that promote Marxist doctrine and encourage division based on creed, race, or economic status.

 

Let me edit for clarity: Texas schools should must teach students basic knowledge and American exceptionalism; our schools must  and reject Critical Race Theory and other curricula that promote Marxist doctrine and encourage division based on creed, race, or economic status.

There might be other improvements to make, but in general I like this concept. We did pass a law basically doing this during the past legislative session. Still, in support of the idea I’ll vote YES.

 

 

Proposition 5: Right to Life (61-0-1)

Texas should enact a State Constitutional Amendment to defend the sanctity of innocent human life, created in the image of God, from fertilization until natural death. 

This would codify into the Constitution what the Republicans, and frankly a majority of Texans, want. We already have a trigger bill, outlawing abortion in Texas when/if the US Supreme Court reverses Roe, which could happen this year. Laws, however, can change; it’s harder to amend the Constitution and requires the approval of the people. So this would be a stronger protection. I’m voting YES.

 

 

Proposition 6: Committee Chairs (61-1-0)

The Republican-controlled Texas Legislature should end the practice of awarding committee chairmanships to Democrats. 

I agree with this. I have been told by a representative that the theory was, if you give them some chairmanship where they won’t do much mischief, it keeps them from spending all their energy thwarting Republicans. I don’t think that strategy is working. And certainly any legislator who fled the state to deny a quorum ought to expect no favors from our side. So, I’m voting YES.

 

 

Proposition 7: Election Integrity (58-0-2)

Texas should protect the integrity of our elections by verifying that registered voters are American citizens, restoring felony penalties and enacting civil penalties for vote fraud, and fighting any federal takeover of state elections.  

I support this, of course. I think the phrase “restoring felony penalties and enacting civil penalties for vote fraud” is difficult to understand. They’re trying to say a lot in a short statement, but I need explanation there. I think there must be some we had felony penalties for that were lowered to misdemeanors and we want to restore the felony penalties. Then, also, there are addition penalties (are they all civil?) for other types of vote fraud that don’t yet have penalties attached. Anyway, the intent is good, and this is a resolution, not a law. So I’m voting YES.

 

 

Proposition 8: Gender Modification (59-1-0)

Texas should ban chemical castration, puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and genital mutilation surgery on all minor children for sex transition purposes. 

Excellent concept. It’s already in our platform. Plank 246 looks like this:

246.             Gender Identity: We oppose all efforts to validate transgender identity. For the purpose of attempting to affirm a person 21 or under if their perception is inconsistent with their biological sex, no medical practitioner or provider may engage in the following practices:

a.       Intervene in any way to prevent natural progression of puberty.

b.       Administer or provide opposite sex hormones.

c.       Perform any surgery on healthy body parts of the underage person.

I’m not fully satisfied with that wording either, but the intention of both the proposition and this plank are to outlaw permanent sex transition of minors. There have also been attempts to label this sort of “therapy” as child abuse. Anyway, I’m in favor of the concept and will vote YES.

 

 

Proposition 9: Parental Educational Relief (57-0-0)

Texas parents and guardians should have the right to select schools, whether public or private, for their children, and the funding should follow the student. 

I’m strongly in favor of school choice. We also need to make sure that the state does not attach any strings to that funding. You’d be surprised how many Republican legislators don’t believe in this concept and don’t want a public vote that will reveal that to their constituents. I’m voting YES.

 

 

Proposition 10: Freedom of Conscience (45-7-1)

Texans affirm that our freedoms come from God and that the government should have no control over the conscience of individuals.  

Our freedoms—our rights—either come from God or from some fallible human. If it’s a human, such person can take away whatever they have granted. But God’s promises are sure.  Governments are instituted among men to protect our rights, not to grant or deny them. If a government isn’t protecting our rights, that tyranny’s power needs to be taken away and restored to the people. So, I’m voting YES.