Blocked from the ballot
Appellate court ruling bars three Green Party candidates from list of voters’ choices in November as result of failure to pay filing fees
An appellate court on Wednesday blocked three Green Party candidates from the November ballot because they failed to pay candidate filing fees.
The candidates are David Collins, who was running for Senate; Tom Wakely, who was running for the 21st Congressional District, and Katija “Kat” Gruene, who was running for the Railroad Commission. The legal challenge was filed by their Democratic opponents: MJ Hegar, Wendy Davis and Chrysta Castañeda, respectively.
Two members of a three-judge panel of the court sided with the Democrats late Wednesday.
In their majority opinion, Justice Thomas Baker wrote that Wakely, Gruene and Collins are ineligible to appear on the ballot and compelled the Green Party to “take all steps within their authority” to ensure they don’t appear on the ballot. Due to the time sensitivity, Baker said the court would not entertain motions for a rehearing.
Chief Justice Jeff Rose dissented, saying providing no other explanation than that relief was “not appropriate based on the record before us.”
Aug. 28 is the deadline for the Texas Secretary of State to certify the names of party nominees for statewide and district offices for placement on the Nov. 3 ballot. The Green Party candidates can no longer file as write-in candidates, as the deadline to declare was Monday.
Earlier Wednesday, in another suit filed by Hegar and the Democratic Senatorial and Congressional Campaign committees, a Travis County district judge had temporarily blocked Collins and Wakely from being certified.
The Green Party, which promotes environmental, anti-war and social justices causes, is often accused of siphoning votes from Democratic candidates, while the Libertarian Party, which advocates for individual rights, is blamed for taking away Republican votes , though the data seldom bears out that point.
Davis’ campaign declined to comment. Hegar’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment. Randy Howry, Hegar’s lawyer in the Travis County case, referred questions about the impetus for the suit to attorney Alexi Velez, who was not available for comment.
Castañeda said the suit was a matter of fairness and that the timing was “based on the fact that the Green Party tactics only recently came to light.”
“I and my fellow candidates worked very hard to get on the ballot, and the statute is clear for all of us,” she said, adding that if the candidates didn’t want to or couldn’t pay the fee, they “could have acquired the signatures to petition to be on the ballot but chose not to do so.”
Third-party groups have chafed at that idea because they say the petition-collection process is also costly.
In 2019, the Legislature passed House Bill 2504, which required minor-party candidates to submit the same number of petitions or filing fee as major-party candidates. Months after it was enacted, the Green Party, Libertarian Party and other third parties and candidates filed two suits, one in federal court and one in state court, seeking to overturn the requirement. One is still pending in federal court, and a second is still pending before an appellate court.
Wakely ran as a Democrat for the same 21st Congressional district seat in 2016 and lost by a 21point margin to then-Republican incumbent Lamar Smith. Gruene ran for Democratic State Rep. Eddie Rodriguez’s District 50 seat in 2016 and got 13 percent of the vote.
Just two of eight Green Party statewide and district candidates have paid filing fees, according to the Secretary of State. The fee in Texas is $5,000 to run for U.S. Senate, $3,125 for the U.S. House and $3,750 for the Railroad Commission. Fifty-three of 70 Libertarian candidates have paid theirs.
Wakely said it was clear to him that the last-minute pile-on of lawsuits was a coordinated strategy to eliminate competition. He added that it was curious that Libertarian candidates, including the one in his 21st District race, Arthur DiBianca, who also did not pay fees, were facing similar scrutiny.
Gruene added that the last-minute nature of the case also seems to be part of the Democrats’ strategy, as it leaves the Green candidates without many options for relief.
Charles Waterbury, a lawyer for the Green Party candidates, agreed that the timing seemed like a tactic and said Democrats should have raised the issue sooner.
“The Democrats waited so long for what I would argue is kind of an artificial emergency,” Waterbury said. “If this is such a huge deal, if keeping the juggernaut that is the Green Party off the ballot is so important, this is something they should have filed way before. … They know the difficulty faced by a party like the Greens is basically insurmountable.”
Gruene said she views the suit against her in the same way as Wakely.
“It’s a way to siderail a campaign to shift into dealing with legal matters instead of campaigning,” Gruene said. “The Democratic Party has always seen the Green Party as their opposition, and they, from 2001 until today, have used lawsuits as a way to bankrupt candidates, bankrupt parties and prevent voters from having the choice of voting for Green Party candidates.”