The courts giveth, and the courts taketh away.
More than 50 Texas House Democrats fled the state last month to deny their chamber a quorum, thus preventing the passage of two GOP-led measures meant to preserve voter integrity. Gov. Greg Abbott announced that when those still missing eventually returned, he would have them arrested.
On Monday, however, Travis County State District Judge Brad Urrutia signed an order preventing Abbott and Texas House Speaker Dade Phelan from "issuing any warrant or other instrument" and "detaining, confining, or otherwise restricting a Texas House Democrat's movement without his or her consent."
What a difference a day makes.
Abbott appealed that order to the Texas Supreme Court, and the court answered the call on Tuesday, according to Abbott spokeswoman Renae Eze.
"The Supreme Court of Texas swiftly rejected this dangerous attempt by Texas Democrats to undermine our Constitution and avoid doing the job they were elected to do," said Eze. "We look forward to the Supreme Court upholding the rule of law and stopping another stall tactic by the Texas Democrats."
The Texas Democrats, sometimes referred to as “flee baggers,” chartered planes to jet them to Washington, D.C., where they appeared to be on the wrong side of history from the get-go.
They joined U.S. Senate Democrats to campaign against the Senate filibuster rule, apparently oblivious to the fact that they were themselves, in effect, filibustering their own House vote by denting their chamber a quorum. Their action was soon dubbed a “flee-ibuster.”
Late last week, the 22 House Democrats still absent from Austin filed a lawsuit in federal district court against Abbott and others, claiming that the threat to have them arrested caused them to “have been deprived of liberty for substantial periods of time, [and they] suffered much anxiety and distress over the separation from their families.”
They also claim to have sustained “much discomfort and embarrassment” due to their reputations having been “impaired.”
It all sounds laughable on the surface. They chose to separate themselves “from their families” and they embarrassed themselves in the process.
But if they had a higher purpose, if they were fighting for a noble cause, maybe they have a point.
- CBS News reported that “Democrats in the Texas House of Representatives kept a bill with sweeping new voting restrictions from passing.”
- Democratic National Committee Chairman Jaime Harrison called the bills they were protesting “a threat to our American democracy,” and their protest “one of those break the glass moments because our democracy really is in balance.”
- And President Biden called the Texas bills “un-American,” “an assault on democracy,” and “often disproportionately targeting Black and Brown Americans.”
So, what were they running from that was so “un-American”?
Two bills: HB 3 and SB 1.
HB 3 would make it a crime to mail out ballots to voters who hadn’t requested them.
“[An] application must be submitted in writing and signed by the applicant using ink on paper,” the legislation says. “An electronic signature or photocopied signature is not permitted.”
HB 3 also would require people to present identification when requesting mail-in ballots.
SB 1 would restrict drive-in voting except in rare circumstances.
Both bills would eliminate 24-hour voting, but nonetheless offer extended hours.
That’s about it.
When the word “Texan” is mentioned, people may think of the rugged individualist, the cowboy, sitting tall in the saddle, who battles drought, sandstorms, and desperados — whatever it takes — to get the job done and put vittles on the table.
They may be reminded of the brave souls who defended the Alamo during that bloody 13-day siege against an overwhelming number of Santa Anna’s troops, which finally ended in their deaths.
The flee bagger Democrats, on the other hand, appear to be whiney, beta-male soy-boys and female “Karens,” who discus how to become “less white” during their monthly manicures.
And what are these modern-day Texans fighting for? The “right” to vote at 2am on the way home from the bars, without presenting identification and without the necessity of leaving their vehicle.
That’s not “restrictive.”
That’s not “un-American.”
And it definitely ain’t the Alamo.
Michael Dorstewitz is a retired lawyer and has been a frequent contributor to BizPac Review and Liberty Unyielding. He is also a former U.S. Merchant Marine officer and an enthusiastic Second Amendment supporter, who can often be found honing his skills at the range. Read Dorstewitz's Reports — More Here
© 2021 Newsmax. All rights reserved.