In Texas, a person usually removes their residence to trigger the ineligibility provisions. Under Texas law, residence is a combination of intent and physical presence, with a lot of emphasis placed on the person's intent. (Remember the famous hotel suite claimed by G.H.W. Bush?)

The change of residency is usually accomplished by a candidate registering to vote in a place outside the district, and the new voter registration certificate is offered as proof of the candidate's intent to reside outside the district. Because the voter registration certificate is a public record, it is conclusive of the voter's intent to reside outside the district (or in this case the state) and serves as a disqualifying record under 145.003(f)(2). (There was a case on this in the Twelfth Court of Appeals over in Tyler about 12-14 years ago to this effect, either Slagle v. Nixon or Nixon v. Slagle if someone wants to read it and contradict me.)

There is nothing in the law that would prevent the party committee from nominating the winner of the special as their candidate in the general. This has happened before as well. Also, the governor has authority to expedite any election by declaring it an emergency election under Sec. 41.0011, and could call it when it suits him to maximize any benefit to a favored candidate.

I believe 201.053 is the Texas answer to the Mel Carnahan dilemma, because it only applies to vacancies occuring between the general election in both the unexpired term and in the full term to be served. In that case, the special election is held only for a full term.

-- 
Hugh L. Brady
Attorney & Counselor at Law
Austin, Texas  | Burlington, Vermont
(512) 275-3600 | (802) 863-1188 Telephone
(512) 233-0970 | (802) 813-1011 Telecopier

PLEASE NOTE: This message was created by a lawyer and may be confidential and privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, kindly delete the message. I would also appreciate a return e-mail letting me know the message went astray. My practice in Vermont is limited exclusively to consultations with licensed lawyers. Thank you.

ALSO PLEASE NOTE: Notwithstanding United States law (including the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978), this e-mail message, without warrant or warning, may be subject to monitoring by the United States National Security Agency and/or the Department of Defense. Information contained in this message may be used against any senders or recipients, now or in the future, in a public trial or secret tribunal.

Rick Hasen wrote:

Here is what I just posted on the election law blog:
http://electionlawblog.org/archives/005318.html

Can Republicans Name a Replacement for Tom DeLay?

With news that Tom DeLay is withdrawing from his House reelection contest, the question is what happens now in his race. It appears that the following is the applicable Texas law (putting aside any caselaw that might affect interpretation of these chapters):

Under Texas Election code section 1.005(7), DeLay was running in a 'General election for state and county officers' [, which] means the general election at which officers of the federal, state, and county governments are elected." Section 145.031 et. seq. set forth the rules for "a candidate who is a political party's nominee in the general election for state and county officers except a candidate for president or vice-president of the United States." DeLay is the party's nominee in a general election for state and county officers and he's not a candidate for president or vice president, so these rules apply.

Under 145.032, DeLay can withdraw because it is more than 74 days before election day. If he withdraws, under section 145.035, his name is omitted from the ballot. Under section 145.036, the political party's executive committee can only fill a vacancy under limited circumstances (such as catastrophic illness), none of which seem to apply to DeLay. So this route does not look like it would work for DeLay.

Instead, reports suggest he will move from Texas, thereby becoming ineligible to serve. (See section 145.003 on declaration of ineligibility.) If he is "ineligible" rather than "withdraws," section 145.036 gives the party the right to name a candidate to fill the vacancy.

There are also rumors that the governor could call a special election. Under 204.021, "An unexpired term in the office of United States representative may be filled only by a special election in the same manner as provided by Chapter 203 for the legislature, except that Section 203.013 does not apply." (203.013 sets forth a timetable for the election.) Chapter 203 sets forth the requirement of a special election, the requirement of a majority vote (meaning a runoff will be necessary if no candidate gets a majority of the vote), etc. But this would only apply to the unexpired term. There's this provision that appears to allow a replacement to run for the full term, but only if the vacancy occurs after the general election. So even if the governor calls a special election that chooses someone to serve out the rest of DeLay's current term, that does not appear to affect the nomination rules for the upcoming general election.

-- 
Rick Hasen
William H. Hannon Distinguished Professor of Law
Loyola Law School
919 South Albany Street
Los Angeles, CA  90015-0019
(213)736-1466 - voice
(213)380-3769 - fax
rick.hasen@lls.edu
http://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/hasen.html
http://electionlawblog.org