Texas’s highest court on Friday rejected an attempt by Gov. Greg Abbott and state Republicans to strip Democratic lawmakers of their seats after a 2025 quorum break that temporarily halted action on new congressional maps. The decision means the court will not treat the lawmakers’ brief departures from Texas as an automatic abandonment of office, as Abbott had argued in a case filed directly to the Texas Supreme Court.
The dispute centered on what happened during a special legislative session called by Abbott to address redistricting and other issues. Under the Texas constitution, at least 100 of the 150 members of the House must be present to conduct business, and the Democratic lawmakers’ walkout shut down the session’s ability to proceed on the maps.
Abbott sought to use the courts as a new enforcement tool, asking the Texas Supreme Court to declare that the Democrats who led the walkout—including House Democratic caucus leader Gene Wu—had vacated their offices. The effort aimed to punish more than 50 Democrats who fled to New York, Illinois and Massachusetts in 2025 as part of the strategy to prevent a vote on congressional districts drawn for the next cycle.
Wu argued that he had not abandoned his office, but instead was exercising a right to dissent. The court’s response left that question unresolved in the way Abbott had requested, instead focusing on the Legislature’s own response to the quorum disruption and on the limits of judicial involvement in conflicts between branches.
Justice James Blacklock wrote that the all-Republican Legislature “adequately resolved the problem itself through measures such as fines against the missing lawmakers,” and noted that the lawmakers returned on their own within a few weeks. Blacklock also said the timing mattered: “In the end, a quorum was restored in two weeks’ time, without judicial intervention, by the interplay of political and practical forces,” according to the opinion.
The court further said “Courts have uniformly recognized that it is not their role to resolve disputes between the other two branches that those branches can resolve for themselves,” the opinion stated. It said that if the issue returns and the Legislature cannot effectively compel lawmakers to return, the court may eventually consider whether judicial intervention is warranted.
After the ruling, Wu said Abbott had threatened to arrest and expel lawmakers and that Democrats responded by telling Abbott to attempt it. Wu said in a Friday statement: “When Greg Abbott threatened to arrest and expel us for denying him a quorum, we told him he should ‘come and take it.’ He tried!” Wu also said: “Abbott was wrong, weak, and after all his bluster, he couldn’t come and take a damn thing.”
Wu and other lawmakers eventually returned to Texas, and the new congressional map was passed and signed into law by Abbott. Wu argued that because he returned to the Capitol and because the map ultimately became law, there was no longer a reason for the court to weigh in, according to the reporting.
Abbott’s office indicated it could revisit the dispute if lawmakers walk out again. Andrew Mahaleris, a spokesman for Abbott, said Friday that Abbott would bring the same issue back to the Texas Supreme Court if legislators leave again, adding that he said no elected official has the right to abandon duties, flee the state, and “shut down the people’s business.”
The case also fits a broader pattern of walkouts in Texas politics. The court previously ruled in 2021 that the state constitution enables the possibility of a quorum break but also allows for consequences to bring lawmakers back, and last year’s Democratic walkout was the third since 2003, when lawmakers bolted to stop a vote on a redistricting bill. In those earlier instances, Democrats’ walkouts delayed action but did not prevent Republicans from eventually passing the measures that followed—setting up a high-stakes repeat as the country’s redistricting battles intensify ahead of the midterms.
In the months leading up to this year’s fights, redistricting efforts across the country were further fueled by a U.S. Supreme Court decision that weakened the Voting Rights Act by limiting whether race can be considered when drawing congressional and other districts. This Texas decision landed as both parties continued their push—an effort that has played out in other states as courts have ruled on competing claims about district maps, including in recent coverage of Trump-backed redistricting efforts. MSI previously reported on Trump’s redistricting push encountering court and legislative roadblocks.