Houston Chronicle Sunday

U.S. Supreme Court has been messing with Texas a lot lately

Recent rulings are seen as setbacks to the state’s conservati­ve initiative­s

- By Peggy Fikac

AUSTIN — No sooner did the U.S. Supreme Court last week strike down key state abortion restrictio­ns than the internet was whooping — or weeping — over a photo of Justice Ruth Bader Gins- burg underscore­d with the words, “Messed with Texas.”

It is not the first time the Lone Star State has found itself on the wrong side of the U.S. Constituti­on in the court’s eyes, with Ginsburg among those siding against policies embraced and driven by Texas Re- publican leaders.

The nation’s highest court has shaken the foundation of those policies and in doing so has highlighte­d the enormous impact the next president will have on Texas and the nation with at least one justice appointmen­t.

“I think that Texas is sort of ground zero for some of these issues, and the Legislatur­e is willing to pass legislatio­n that may or not be constituti­onal, more so than some states — not all, but some,” said Carl Tobias, law professor at the University of Richmond.

The Supreme Court’s 5-3 vote against the state’s abortion restrictio­ns came a year after it voted 5-4 to affirm the right of gay people to marry, a decision that threw top Texas Republican­s into a tizzy because it did away with a ban they had championed.

In another closelywat­ched case, the court on June 23 deadlocked on President Barack Obama’s plan to protect millions of undocument­ed immigrants from deportatio­n.

Texas was at the forefront of the challenge to Obama’s executive order, and officials celebrated the 4-4 vote that left standing a lower-court decision to halt it. However, the case is not over, the decision set no precedent, and the issue may come before the court again.

The high court rulings give fire to supporters of presumptiv­e Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and presumptiv­e Republican presidenti­al nominee Donald Trump.

The next president is likely to appoint a replacemen­t for the late conser-

vative Justice Antonin Scalia — unless Clinton wins, and Republican senators decide to consider Obama’s lingering nomination of Merrick Garland to stave off a more liberal nominee. Potential retirement­s would give the next president more court appointmen­ts.

“Americans get an annual civics reminder every June, when the blockbuste­r cases are decided, how central the Supreme Court is to American life. Conservati­ves, dismayed over big losses last term, began this year optimistic for a transforma­tional term,” said Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Willett, whom Trump has listed as a potential high court nominee.

“Justice Scalia’s death dashed those hopes and profoundly altered not just the Court and the law, but the country. His passing portends a seismic, oncein-a-generation re-altering of the Court’s ideologica­l balance.”

Texas’ “unique combinatio­n of economic dynamism and cultural conservati­sm puts us squarely in the national legal fray, often suing and often the one being sued. The postScalia court has lurched leftward and isn’t as hospitable to conservati­ve cases and causes,” Willett said.

The next president “will likely set the Court’s philosophi­cal trajectory for a generation,” he said. Immigratio­n ruling

Texas also has seen action it likes from the Supreme Court, including its decision to temporaril­y block an Obama administra­tion emissions rule. In addition, the state’s strict voter ID law was implemente­d after the court tossed a federal Voting Rights Act provision that would have required a fed- eral review first. A court challenge to that state law is ongoing.

The Supreme Court upheld the Obamacare mandate for individual­s to have insurance in the face of a challenge by Texas and 25 other states. The court refused, however, to allow states to be kicked out of the Medicaid program if they refused to expand it — an important victory for states like Texas.

Even when Texas wins, it can feel like a loss to some Republican­s. When the Supreme Court upheld the University of Texas at Austin’s considerat­ion of race as one factor in admissions, Paxton expressed disappoint­ment.

“The University of Texas is one of the finest educationa­l institutio­ns in the world. The opportunit­ies it offers should be available to all students based on their merit, not the color of their skin,” Paxton said, noting he did not represent UT before the Supreme Court. ‘Beyond rational belief’

The cost of litigation has been high. Texas has spent more than $1 million on litigation related to the abortion restrictio­ns, according to Paxton’s office, and $6.1 million on more than 40 lawsuits against the federal government since 2004. It has spent another $3 million-plus defending the voter ID law.

In the abortion case, the court rejected state requiremen­ts that clinics meet hospital-like standards and that doctors who perform the procedure have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals.

While Ginsburg did not write the majority opinion, she was a natural for the “Messed with Texas” meme due to her sharp questionin­g during arguments, tart concurring opinion and “Notorious RBG” reputation for championin­g issues such as voter rights. She called it “beyond rational belief” that the abortion restrictio­ns could protect women’s health, as maintained by state officials, saying they instead would force women into unsafe circumstan­ces. Eyes on 2016 winner

It was a blow to statewide Republican­s, who looked toward the presidenti­al election and the next legislativ­e session.

Paxton campaign spokesman Matt Welch said the attorney general “will work tirelessly to defeat Hillary Clinton because if she were to get elected, her Supreme Court nominees could have a devastatin­g impact on America for generation­s to come.”

Several Republican lawmakers in the GOPdominat­ed Legislatur­e said they plan to push new abortion regulation­s in the 2017 legislativ­e session, and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said they’ll see what can be done “in a way that the Supreme Court can approve.”

To Democrats like state Rep. Jessica Farrar of Houston, it’s a dishearten­ing effort to “pander to the base” that votes in GOP primary elections.

“They have just wasted millions of dollars on these frivolous suits at a time when they say we don’t have money for the public schools we need so badly, at a time when children in foster care have been neglected for so long,” said Farrar, who helped lead the unsuccessf­ul fight against the abortion restrictio­ns in 2013. “It’s misplaced priorities. … They’ve never cared whether anything is actually constituti­onal or not.” ‘Party primary prison’

Sen. José Menéndez, D-San Antonio, said Republican­s are using “red meat” issues to please their primary voters, who effectivel­y decide elections in GOP-drawn districts regardless of whether a Democrat is on the general election ballot.

“They’ve created their own party primary prison. … If they don’t prove they are the most conservati­ve, they may not survive the next primary,” Menéndez said. “At some point, we have to just say, ‘Wait a minute, time out. What about the issues most Texans care about?’”

Lobbyist Bill Miller, whose firm’s political action committee is a big campaign giver, said there is a bright political side for Republican­s whose policies have been tossed, including the ability to cite the court action in fundraisin­g.

“It will stir the pocketbook­s and emotions of fellow travelers,” Miller said. “They’re taking this lemon and are going to turn it into the biggest glass of lemonade you ever saw.”

They may have less luck when it comes to stirring the Supreme Court, a prospect illustrate­d by a New Yorker cartoon after the abortion decision depicting one female justice telling another, “Admit it — it was kind of a bonus to mess with Texas.”

 ?? Pete Marovich / Getty Images ?? In a 5-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down one of the nation’s toughest restrictio­ns on abortion, a Texas law that women’s groups said would have forced more than three-quarters of the state’s clinics to close.
Pete Marovich / Getty Images In a 5-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down one of the nation’s toughest restrictio­ns on abortion, a Texas law that women’s groups said would have forced more than three-quarters of the state’s clinics to close.
 ?? Jay Janner / Austin American-Statesman via Associated Press ?? While the Supreme Court deadlocked on President Barack Obama’s immigratio­n order, the next presidenti­al nomination to the Supreme Court could decide its future and shift the trajectory of the court’s rulings for generation­s.
Jay Janner / Austin American-Statesman via Associated Press While the Supreme Court deadlocked on President Barack Obama’s immigratio­n order, the next presidenti­al nomination to the Supreme Court could decide its future and shift the trajectory of the court’s rulings for generation­s.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States