Three Texas Supreme Court judges face spirited challenges

All three longtime incumbents, including a justice from Tarrant County, face challengers in the battle for seats on the Texas Supreme Court.

The running theme of the March 1 Republican primary is whether the court has deviated from its true purpose: to interpret the state constitution. One challenger described himself as a “constitutional watchdog,” and two others say they want to restore a respect for Texas law to the court.

Incumbents, meanwhile, have fired back that their opponents are unfit to serve on the bench because of a lack of experience.

“We live in a very red state,” Place 5 Justice Paul W. Green said. “Every statewide office is held by a Republican. All the judges on the Supreme Court of Texas are very conservative. None of us are activist judges.

“The idea that you need a ‘constitutional watchdog’ to look over the court to make sure we’re not stepping out of bounds is offensive.”

And, in an unusual twist to this year’s primary, two men seeking the same seat on the state’s highest civil appeals court have the same last name.

Early voting ends Friday.

Consumer groups are urging voters to do their homework. The state’s high court has a big influence on the lives of Texans. The court’s jurists rule on important matters, including public school funding, workplace safety and insurance disputes.

“It’s important that we have judges who have a respect for the law and have the judicial temperament that’s differential to local citizens,” said N. Alex Winslow, executive director of Texas Watch, an Austin watchdog organization that advocates on behalf of consumer interests.

Place 3

Justice Debra Lehrmann, 59, of Colleyville, is seeking re-election. She has served six years on the state supreme court.

The local jurist is facing off against Michael Massengale, a 1990 graduate of Southwest High School in Fort Worth. Massengale is certified in civil appellate law and sits on the First Court of Appeals.

Massengale, 43, says he is better suited for the role because of his experience as an appellate judge. The Houston resident says he has tried cases over $1 billion, while his opponent lacks that experience.

If elected, Massengale said that he would stick to a strict interpretation of Texas law, unlike his opponent, whom he described as being an “outlier” on a court that has a strict interpretation of Texas statutes.

“I am completely against activist judges,” he said. Lehrmann “most frequently goes outside Texas statutes to support her interpretation,” he said.

Lehrmann said she has reviewed more than 1,500 cases a year and written 130 to 150 opinions a year. Such cases are broad and involve sovereign immunity, property rights, First Amendment rights, oil and gas disputes, and other topics.

What’s more, she is rarely the only dissenter. “Usually, those cases are joined by other justices,” she said.

She believes it’s her duty to write a dissenting opinion when necessary. “That’s going to sharpen the majority writing,” she said.

Added Lehrmann: “The public deserves an amicable court and a court that respect’s each others’ opinions, but also we should not be rubber-stamping each other. We need to challenge one another and make sure we get it right.”

Place 5

The race for Place 5 is between two men with the same last name — a situation that’s sparked a lot of conversation across the state about name confusion.

Place 5 Justice Paul Green is seeking his third term on the court. He has brandished a law license for almost four decades, and has been a judge since 1995. He was elected to the state’s highest court in 2005.

Paul Green said that his opponent lacks in experience.

“My opponent has done a lot of things, but very little of it has to do with practicing law,” Paul Green said. “He’s not practicing law now. He’s never tried a case. He’s never been a judge.

“If you want to be on the Texas Supreme Court, you need a lot of knowledge about what goes on in courtrooms.”

Place 5 opponent Rick Green, 45, a lawyer and a former Texas legislator from Dripping Springs, asked that questions from the Star-Telegram be submitted in writing.

In his response, Rick Green wrote that he has a “proven conservative record and awards from virtually every conservative organization in Texas.”

If elected, Rick Green said he would be “a constitutional watchdog focused on restoring separation of powers and protecting constitutional rights, such as religious liberty, due process and the Second Amendment right to bear arms.”

“I have spent the last 20 years in the study, teaching and protection of these core principles of our republic. I have the right experience and the right values for this particular time in our history.

“Many politicians talk a good game about respecting the Constitution, but I have two decades of a proven track record in defending the Constitution.”

Place 9

The race for Place 9 is punctuated by accusations of ethical breaches and professional misconduct.

Incumbent Eva Guzman, 54, is facing off against Joe Pool, a Dripping Springs lawyer who sought a seat on the court in 2012 after his wife was denied a jury trial in probate court.

Guzman, who is from Houston, said she has a “conservative judicial philosophy” unlike her opponent, who can’t “be trusted with the most important decisions” in Texas.

Pool was ordered to pay $2,250 in connection with a case involving the probate will of his wife’s father, according to the State Bar of Texas. The accusations were that Pool had submitted false documentation.

Pool said the action stemmed from his wife’s contest of a forged will. He said all the actions against him were under the direction of his opponent, Guzman. He says Guzman is in the pocket of lawsuit reformers who are hostile to jury trials. (He pointed to a prior survey by Texas Watch that showed the court had overturned 74 percent of jury verdicts on civil cases involving consumer interests.)

“The difference between me and most other people right now is my belief in the right of trial by jury,” Pool said.

Pool also has attacked Guzman on other rulings, including a transparency case involving whether some municipal records were public under the Texas Public Information Act.

Guzman said other jurists agreed with her ruling.

This story was originally published February 22, 2016 at 8:16 PM with the headline "Three Texas Supreme Court judges face spirited challenges."