By Linda P. Campbell
lcampbell@star-telegram.com
What was it that Texas' Republican members of the U.S. House wanted to hide behind the Constitution's speech and debate clause?
Was it their horse-trading of voting precincts like baseball cards or fantasy football league players during the Texas Legislature's redrawing of the congressional voting map?
Lawyer for House delegation to lawyer for Texas House Speaker Joe Straus: "Lamar would like Bexar pct 4008 (465 people); ... It's the SA Country Club adjacent to SJS's house."
Translation: Rep. Lamar Smith, House Judiciary Committee chairman, wanted a certain San Antonio precinct included in the realigned version of the district he currently represents.
Rep. Kenny Marchant of Dallas to House delegation lawyer: "My grand babies go to Hockaday School on forest lane AND Inwood. I have the north side of forest, Pete has the south side. Please go across the street and pluck the campus out of Pete and put in my district."
Translation: Change the boundary because Rep. Pete Sessions doesn't have Marchant's Hockaday ties.
Or was it those
other e-mails they didn't want out -- the ones confirming Republican infighting over whether Hispanic voters were being shifted around in a way that would get the resulting redistricting plan shot down in court?
In June, Dub Maines, an aide to U.S. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Arlington, complained that a map approved by a Texas House committee had "next to no chance" of getting the federal preclearance that the Voting Rights Act requires for new electoral districts to go into effect.
Maines also called an idea floating around to challenge the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act "high-risk poker with no discernible positive return."
Later that same day, Smith e-mailed Sessions, asking him to call Barton and get Maines to stop sending memos that "may be used against us in court."
Barton already had filed a suit in May challenging whatever map the Legislature eventually came up with.
Politico.com reported that he wanted to make Texas' four new congressional districts Republican-leaning, while Smith expected that two would favor Democrats.
The e-mail exchanges came out in court last week. At this point, they seem to advance the cause of open government more than arguments against the plans, which are being closely examined by panels of federal judges in San Antonio and Washington, D.C.
The San Antonio court has scheduled a Sept. 6 trial over state and congressional redistricting plans, and that's where GOP House members tried to prevent disclosure of e-mails they and their aides exchanged with Texas lawmakers and their staffers during the remap process.
But the court rejected the far-fetched claim that the communications were confidential under the speech and debate clause, which shields members of Congress while they work on legislation.
(The provision also is associated with former Rep. William Jefferson, who won a court ruling that FBI agents wrongly took materials from his Capitol Hill office. Alas, the Louisiana Democrat got convicted of corruption over the $90,000 of illicit cash in his freezer.)
The San Antonio court ruled that just because members of Congress are interested in redistricting, the Constitution doesn't prevent disclosure of their attempts to influence how state lawmakers go about it.
Most of the e-mails are fairly innocuous. But one discusses court strategy months before the congressional map was even finalized during a special session in Austin.
Smith e-mailed Straus' chief of staff in April about a meeting GOP delegation members had with Baker Botts lawyers Tom Phillips (a former Texas Supreme Court chief justice) and Sam Cooper.
"We agree that we are not going to seek doj preclearance but will go to a three judge panel in d.c.," Smith wrote, then noted the large number of potential judges who'd been appointed by Democratic presidents. "This is another reason why map needs to be balanced if we are going to avoid having a court appeal. ... Could tom and sam give you a memo on this process with some strategic advice that might be helpful in persuading st reps and others to support our proposal."
On July 19, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott asked the federal court in Washington to approve maps for congressional and statehouse districts. Over Abbott's objections, the D.C. court ruled Tuesday that state Sen. Wendy Davis and state Rep. Marc Veasey, both Fort Worth Democrats, could intervene in the case. They have until Wednesday to file a brief detailing their arguments.
Linda P. Campbell is a Star-Telegram editorial writer.817-390-7867 @LindaPCampbell
Looking for comments?
