[mrsmith]

"Texas law says at this point, DeLay has to withdraw from the election."
No.
"Sec.145.003. ADMINISTRATIVE DECLARATION OF INELIGIBILITY.
...(f)A candidate may be declared ineligible only if: (1)the information on the candidate’s application for a place on the ballot indicates that the candidate is ineligible for the office; or (2)facts indicating that the candidate is ineligible are conclusively established by another public record."

:I asume Delay offered such "facts" from "another public record".

"only the House can declare him ineligible due to residency"
No, they just have the final word, if they wish, after the election.
"Sec. 141.001. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC OFFICE... (c)Subsection (a) does not apply to an office for which the federal or state constitution or a statute outside this code prescribes exclusive eligibility requirements."

:By construction- any part of the Texas Election law without this disclaimer does apply to such offices.

The appellate ruling(s) will be informative.

[RustMartialis]

":I asume Delay offered such "facts" from "another public record"."

Why don't you read the decision instead of assuming?

The only factor claimed to make him 'ineligible' is his alleged non-residency. The problem being that the Constitution says residency only matters on the date of election. Given that DeLay maintains a residence in Texas (his wife is living there), it is far from clear he *isn't* a 'resident' of Texas for election purposes.

DeLay is simply trying to avoid the penalty for withdrawing (no GOP replacement candidate allowed) by claiming to be non-resident, and having the GOP executive declare him ineligible by such non-residency. The problem is they can't legally make that decision, since the Constitution isn't something that a state political party can overturn by fiat.

--R.