Lawsuits target Black female candidates
Before 17 Black women were elected to the bench in Harris County in 2018, there was not much concern about the qualifications needed to run for a Texas judicial position. The women made history as the largest group of Black female judges elected in Texas.
Now, a state law, HB 2384, which took effect in September and had nearly unanimous bipartisan support, is being used to question the qualifications of three Black women running for Harris County judicial positions in the March primary. In each instance, a white, male incumbent judge has tried using the new law to remove a Democratic primary challenger from the ballot.
The law, which is neutral and vague, was designed to ensure those who run for office as district court or appellate court judges meet certain educational and training requirements, such as courtroom experience, a current law license and practicing law in the last five years.
Sounds fair, but this is Texas.
In practice, it sets up fresh candidates for a slap in the face. They get bad publicity and steep legal bills before they can even get their campaigns off the ground, even when a judge ultimately finds that they’re qualified for the offices they seek. It’s also a way to discredit Black women, who are a steadfast voting bloc.
The women named in the lawsuits are: Erica Hughes, who was one of the judges elected in 2018 and is running for the 151st District Court position held by incumbent Mike Englehardt; Amber Boyd-Cora, who is seeking the 1st District Court of Appeals position held by incumbent Peter Kelly; and TaKasha Francis, who is running for the 152nd Civil District Court seat held by Robert Schaffer.
The suits have alleged various improprieties, including not having the qualifications
for the positions, failure to disclose certain information, and even forgery of the required signatures needed for application to run for office. The latter claim has little to do with this law but is another way to disqualify a candidate.
Incumbents, by the way, are exempt from meeting the new requirements.
“This has never been an issue before we had a sweep of African-American women who became judges, and no one was concerned,” said Vanessa Gilmore, retired US district judge who recently joined Roberts Markland LLP. “I feel like this new law has been weaponized against
Black women to protect the incumbents. It doesn’t have to have discriminatory intent to have a discriminatory impact.”
In the cases of Hughes and Boyd-Cora, the suits went to the Texas Supreme Court and were dismissed. A judge set Francis’ case for a jury trial, but it is uncertain it will go to trial in light of previous rulings. There is no indication that non-Black judicial candidates running against incumbents are facing similar lawsuits.
“The Texas Democratic Party is trying to resurrect the white Primary by using the subjective test to disqualify Black candidates,” said Lloyd E. Kelley, an attorney who has represented the women, in his argument to the state Supreme Court in January regarding Boyd-Cora’s case. “Such a use of this legislation, though it may appear neutral on its face, as practiced by the Democratic incumbents … is unconstitutional.”
Frankly, to target these women for being unqualified is ridiculous. Take Hughes, a U.S. Army veteran, who has served as a U.S. immigration judge and has presided over courtrooms in Harris County Criminal Court and Harris County Veterans Court.
“I would have never voted for a law that would be weaponized against Black women,” said state Rep. Jolanda Jones, D-Houston. “These women are not the only people running against incumbents, but also we know based on the last elections that when Black women run against white men in Harris County, they’ve won.”
As our state continues to become more Black, Hispanic, and Asian, I imagine the old guard of Texas politics will roll out the red carpet for other tactics to discredit candidates and disenfranchise votes.
“Every time we start running the race, they move the finish line. This is another effort to create an obstacle,” Gilmore said.
We’ve been here before.