Posted on 07/06/2006 9:28:20 AM PDT by AntiGuv
AUSTIN — A federal judge ruled today that Republicans cannot replace former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay on the ballot for the 22nd Congressional District race.
U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks, a Republican appointee, ruled that DeLay must appear on the Nov. 7 ballot as the GOP nominee for the congressional seat that DeLay abandoned last month. Sparks ruling was confirmed by Texas Democratic Party spokeswoman Amber Moon.
Details of Sparks ruling were not immediately available.
Sparks ruling halts the process of replacing DeLay on the ballot, but the GOP is expected to appeal the decision to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
If the Republicans lose on appeal, DeLay will have to decide whether to campaign for an office from which he already has resigned.
When he announced his resignation, DeLay said he believed he could win re-election but thought he would be a drag on other Republican candidates for office because Democrats would use him as a lightening rod to raise money and attack the GOP in general. So he resigned and dropped his re-election bid.
Precinct chairs in the four counties of the 22nd District already have started the process of selecting a new nominee.
Republicans who have been vying for the seat are Sugar Land lawyer Tom Campbell; state Reps. Charlie Howard or Sugar Land and Robert Talton of Pasadena; state Sen. Mike Jackson of Houston; Houston City Councilwoman Shelley Sekula-Gibbs; Fort Bend County Commissioner Andy Meyers; Sugar Land Mayor David Wallace; retired Air Force Maj. Don Richardson; and former state GOP executive committee member Tim Turner.
The Democratic nominee is former U.S. Rep. Nick Lampson of Houston. The Libertarian Party is represented by Bob Smither of Friendswood.
DeLay already had won the Republican nomination for re-election to his district when he resigned from the U.S. House on June 9. Texas Republican Chair Tina Benkiser declared DeLay ineligible because he had become a resident of Virginia, and she started the process of replacing DeLay on the ballot.
The Texas Democratic Party sued, claiming Benkiser had no authority to declare DeLay ineligible.
The Democrats said DeLay's eligibility is determined by the U.S. Constitution as to which state DeLay is an inhabitant of on election day, Nov. 7. They said DeLay also could not withdraw from the race because state law does not allow a party's nominee to withdraw when another political party also has a nominee.
Republicans argued that Benkiser could declare DeLay ineligible because the Constitution allows the states to control the manner and means of the election. They said that by changing his official residence to Virginia, DeLay had made himself ineligible for the Texas office, even though he still maintained a home in Sugar Land.
DeLay last year had to give up his position as House majority leader after being indicted in Austin on campaign-finance related charges. DeLay said that investigation was politically motivated by Democratic District Attorney Ronnie Earle.
DeLay became a focus of national news reports in the wake of the Jack Abramoff influence peddling scandal. DeLay has maintained his innocence, but two of his former aides have pleaded guilty to federal charges.
Chapter 141, section 141.001 and Chapter 145 appear to be the most relevant.
New Jersey law had nothing to do with the Torch stepping aside for the Cadaver. The highest court of New Jersey ignored the law because they wanted a Democrat to win.
I wasn't wrong....I do understand that Earle was on a fishing expedition and didn't have a case. Delay should not have stepped down from his leadership position!
He's a liability now, because he ran for re-election, won, then stepped down. Now he's given the seat to a DUmocrat because he wouldn't stand up to them and RINOs who want his seat or leadership position. "Political liability" isn't the case because he won the primary. He's only a target by dems and media whores making hay of the situation, just as Frist is a target of the leftist liars. That alone should not cause Delay to resign regardless if spineless GOP higher ups support him or not.
DUmocrats don't abide by any ethical or moral standard, so the Repubs shouldn't be required to step down just because a DUmmy starts a smear campaign. When did Reid or Pelosi call for Patches Kennedy, Wm. Jefferson or Moonbat McKinney to resign their seats? I won't hold my breath either.
" If Judge Sparks is the ogre you say"
I never said he was an ogre. I have cited his liberal rulings in a numbers of cases. IMHO he's a liberal Judge,
contrary to both the media 'Republican' label and statements on this board.
I also read his decision here and while I disagree with it I certainly wont call it egregious. I *dont* think 'cheating is OK' and it is wrong for you to say that. I happen to think fulfilling requirements of an election law is *not* cheating, and felt that was done. This is no more "cheating" than what Phil Gramm did in 1983. (He resigned from Congress as a Democrat so he could run for his own seat as a Republican.)
Either way, the Texas GOP and Delay *will* follow the law as determined by the courts, and so leave aside the 'cheating' talk.
"Delay should not have stepped down from his leadership position! "
He Had no choice! Indicted officials are removed from leadership positions. House Rules, and the attempt to carve an "Earle exception" failed, for good political reason.
As I stated, the rules were put in place by those seeking to undermine his leadership to take his place. DUmocrats don't follow rules (they don't have any), so he's playing right into the desires of the opposition and become their tool.
As I stated, the rules were put in place by those seeking to undermine his leadership to take his place.
Had Campbell won the primary, Stockman would have gotten the signatures to get on the ballot with no problem and GOP nominee Campbell would have finished third in the election.
"I suspect that Lampson might be easier to knock off in 2008 than in 2006, because a Presidential vote will bring out a lot of voters who don't involve themselves in politics beyond party ID and won't know Lampson from Ted Kennedy. And because we'll have a strong standard bearer."
Stockman would have gotten the signatures to get on the ballot with no problem and GOP nominee Campbell would have finished third in the election.
Yes he does... Perry can appoint someone to hold the office until a special election can be held.
There's plenty of precedent for this. The best example is back in 1993, when Lloyd Bentsen resigned from the Senate to become Clinton's Treasury secretary. The governor of Texas at that time, Ann Richards, appointed Bob Krueger to replace him until a special election was held later that year, won by current Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison.
-PJ
The 5th Circuit tends to rule conservatively and with judicial restraint, as one might expect since the circuit includes Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi. The court is made up of mostly Reagan, Bush 41 & Bush 43 appointees, including the most recent addition, Priscilla Owen. Whether this appeals court will overturn Sparks' decision or not remains to be seen, but I wouldn't be surprised if they do overturn it and let the Republicans replace DeLay.
You're right... I stand corrected. Texas Election Code § 204.021 states, "An unexpired term in the office of United States representative may be filled only by a special election in the same manner as provided by Chapter 203 for the legislature..."
Thank you for that info.
Have you seen the latest - rumors that Delay may run after all?
Thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.