Posted on 01/18/2022 8:22:45 AM PST by CrosscutSaw
The case was interpreted according to the Texas Constitution, not the Federal Constitution.
Texas Republican is consistently GOPe. This is especially true for ones in the legal profession. And Texas is utterly infested with those who would be democrats, but know they have no chance to hold office as a dem. So like pirates, they fly a flag of convenience and run as what would have been a Texas Democrat in the 80s.
R beside the name means very little in Texas except they want a job. Only in the big cities do the communists actually run as “democrat”.
Texas Court of Appeals is elected, and has to run statewide. The only possible way to get on the Court of Appeals is to run as a “Republican”. So it attracts closet rats.
Since 1951 it’s been fine, now suddenly it’s a problem. Funny how that works.
Texas Court of Appeals Rules State Cannot Prosecute Vote Fraud,Fox News and
I guess I’ll have to look, but I doubt there is no provision for any possible oversight and necessary punishment of rogue prosecutors, if not by the AG then by the Governor or his appointee, which could be the AG. But let’s say there’s not, do you have an opinion on what is involved in getting the CA. Thanks.
Maybe I’m missing something — but does this mean that 200 million registered Texas Republicans can vote in the next election? I guess that might carry a hint of fraud, but it can’t be prosecuted, right?
Thanks for reply PatriotarchyQ.
I'm not familiar with Texas Constitution. But if state constitution violates federal constitution then state constitution needs to be appropriately amended imo.
Don’t matter sooner or later Texas will go blue. We have an explosion of illegal aliens and blue state liberal locust invaders. Remember cruz and the fake mexican election was too close for comfort! Not only did the court guaranteed ok to cheat but encouraged it! Now you know why the UN and the rats are supporting illegals to come here. Btw, where the hell did the trillion dollar 💵 go? Some went to the UN to cover the debit cards being handed out to those making the journey here....that means you and I are funding the world to come here and invade us! 😡
Fine, if that's the way they want to run elections we can play that game to.
Just have all the other counties print 4 times the number of ballots than they have voters and include them.
When the dems complain just say sorry can't comment because its under investigation after two years issue a report saying its all been investigated and no fraud was found.
I don’t think the Federal Constitution controls how a state Constitution deals with the scope of its Attorney General’s prosecutorial power (or lack thereof), especially when there is a robust system of prosecution otherwise set up in the state.
There's nothing preventing Texas from prosecuting voter fraud.
The question is which state official has the authority to do it.
No, the question is, what oversight is there for cases when the local prosecutor refuses to prosecute voter fraud. And apparently, for 70 years there was a process for doing that. But if that is rightly (or especially if wrongly) being taken away, then there is something preventing Texas for prosecuting voter fraud - in the form of untouchable local prosecutors who refuse to enforce it.
Mary Lou Keel, Scott Walker, Jesse McClure. All are elected at large, so no districts.
Read the opinion. It’s based on the law and the Constitution. The moron trailer park class is too stupid to see the constitutional and statutory reasoning here.
These are not “Soros judges” they are following the law, because it’s what the Constitution demands.
——-
The Texas Constitution contains this explicit separation of powers provision unlike the federal Constitution which contains no express separation of powers provision. Instead, separation of powers is implied through the federal constitution’s structure, dividing government into three branches, and through vesting into each branch its particular power, legislative, executive, or judicial. U.S. Const., Arts. I, § 1, II, § 1, III, § 1. We have previously held that this textual difference between the United States and Texas constitutions suggests that Texas would “more aggressively enforceseparation of powers between its governmental branches than would the federal government.” See State v. Rhine, 297 S.W.3d 301, 309 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009).
The 1876 Texas Constitution provides that the office of the Attorney General is in the executive branch. Id. at 879. The constitutional duties of the office are as follows:
The Attorney General shall represent the State in all suits and pleas in the Supreme Court of the State in which the State may be a party, and shall especially inquire into the charter rights of all private corporations, and from time to time, in the name of the State, take such action in the courts as may be proper and necessary to prevent any private corporation from exercising any power or demanding or collecting any species of taxes, tolls, freight or wharfage not authorized by law. He shall, whenever sufficient cause exists, seek a judicial forfeiture of such charters, unless otherwise expressly directed by law, and give legal advice in writing to the Governor and other executive officers, when requested by them, and perform such other duties as may be required by law.
Tex. Const. art. IV, § 22.
Although the duties of the county and district attorney are not enumerated in article V, section 21, our courts have long recognized that, along with various civil duties, their primary function is “to prosecute the pleas of the state in criminal cases.” Meshell v. State, 739 S.W.2d 246, 254 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987); see also Saldano, 70 S.W.3d at 877 (holding that the express provision conferring on the county and district attorneys the authority to represent the State in “the District and inferior courts,” Tex. Const. art. V, § 21, mandates a vertical separation of powers between the Attorney General and the district attorneys in matters of criminal prosecution); see also Baker v. Wade, 743 F.2d 236, 242 n. 28 (5th Cir. 1984) (county and district attorneys have been bestowed with the “exclusive responsibility and control of criminal prosecutions”).
The separation of powers doctrine requires that “any attempt by one department of government to interfere with the powers of another is null and void.” Meshell, 739 S.W.2d at 252. Although one department has occasionally exercised a power that would otherwise seem to fit within the power of another department, courts have approved those actions only when authorized by an express provision of the constitution. Id. “Exceptions to the constitutionally mandated separation of powers are never to be implied in the least; they must be ‘expressly permitted’ by the Constitution itself.” Fin. Comm’n of Tex v. Norwood, 418 S.W.3d 566, 570 (Tex. 2014) (quoting Tex. Const. art. II, § 1).
————
The correct fix is to Amend the Constitution and/or the statute, not ignore the law because you don’t like it.
Folks, we aren’t the left. Outcome based judging has no place in a Constitutional Republic.
The Demoscats pegged the fraud meter pretty hard in the last "election".
Agree entirely. The sanctity of voting is fundamental to the survival of our Republic.
Why should anyone give their life defending a nation and a way of life when that way of life can be altered or taken away by fraudulent voting, and the illegal votes of illegals?
"Texas Court of Appeals struck down a statute from 1951 allowing Texas Attorney General to prosecute vote fraud if local officials fail to do so."
Section 2 of the 14th Amendment makes the state the defendant imo, requiring that alleged voting fraud in a state is at least properly investigated imo, proven violations of Section 2 appropriately dealt with.
Anything short of Section 2 is effectively a wrong nullification of that section imo.
The Texas courts are arguing that the Attorney General is an executive office, and therefore cannot act in a judicial role, asserting that Texas has a division of powers that is much more tightly defined than the U.S. Constitution. This means that ANY law that relies on the Attorney General to prosecute is illegal.
The simple remedy, of course, is for the state legislature to create a new office of a state prosecutor.
WTF?!
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.