This might be a smooth move on the governor's part.
Expel the members. Since they are no longer officially representatives, the remaining lawmakers can then hold a vote on redistricting in Texas.
The representatives will eventually come back and legally fight for reinstating their legislative positions. They will likely retain their seats... but the vote has already been taken and redistricting was passed by a majority legally after the lawmakers were expelled for refusing to attend a session.
That would be a weird legal issue. Lawmakers could try to argue that they weren't available for a vote that they were intentionally and illegally hiding from... and that while they were violating the law by not attending, they should still have legal rights to have attended... so the vote shouldn't have been held.
Erm, they decided not to vote. They are legally obligated to be present for the vote (otherwise arrest warrants could not have been issued).
At what point does breaking the law (i.e. not presenting for a quorum vote) make it so that one's right to vote as a lawmaker are reneged? As in: failed as a represntative, and fired. When one obstinately excapes the state, to avoid voting? This now emerges to be the case.
The fact that they are moving their carcasses around, indicates they are alive. Which means they could have fulfilled their duty. So they are clearly shirking.
Hardly going to fly that the vote 'shouldn't have been held'. Clearly, it should have. Redistricting is part and parcel of what happens every cycle. When one 'runs' to be a 'representative of the people' one must understand that this job comes with obligations, not just 'rights'.
This might be a smooth move on the governor's part.
Expel the members. Since they are no longer officially representatives, the remaining lawmakers can then hold a vote on redistricting in Texas.
The representatives will eventually come back and legally fight for reinstating their legislative positions. They will likely retain their seats... but the vote has already been taken and redistricting was passed by a majority legally after the lawmakers were expelled for refusing to attend a session.
That would be a weird legal issue. Lawmakers could try to argue that they weren't available for a vote that they were intentionally and illegally hiding from... and that while they were violating the law by not attending, they should still have legal rights to have attended... so the vote shouldn't have been held.
Erm, they decided not to vote. They are legally obligated to be present for the vote (otherwise arrest warrants could not have been issued).
At what point does breaking the law (i.e. not presenting for a quorum vote) make it so that one's right to vote as a lawmaker are reneged? As in: failed as a represntative, and fired. When one obstinately excapes the state, to avoid voting? This now emerges to be the case.
The fact that they are moving their carcasses around, indicates they are alive. Which means they could have fulfilled their duty. So they are clearly shirking.
Hardly going to fly that the vote 'shouldn't have been held'. Clearly, it should have. Redistricting is part and parcel of what happens every cycle. When one 'runs' to be a 'representative of the people' one must understand that this job comes with obligations, not just 'rights'.
Rofl...hilarious. Can't wait for that ruling:
Thanks
See the clerk...