Thread by @chucklindell

After Tuesday's order requiring 3 Green candidates to be reinstated to the ballot despite not paying a required candidate filing fee, the Texas Supreme Court today issued its opinion explaining why.
Stick with me on this. The logic path takes some explaining.
1/9

In an unsigned opinion with no justices recused, the Texas Supreme Court said the filing fee law, passed in 2019, does not contain a strict deadline to pay the candidate filing fee.
2/9

So when the Dems challenged the Greens for failing to pay it on Aug. 17, the Green co-chairs were under no legal duty to declare those candidates invalid because there was no deadline.
3/9

Then, when the 3rd Court of Appeals ruled Aug. 19 that the Green Party was obligated to declare the candidates ineligible, that was a mistake because the 3rd Court did not give the candidates a chance to pay the fee.
4/9

Under a previous Supreme Court ruling on ballot access, candidates must be given "an opportunity to cure" when they could still comply with Election Code requirements.
So the 3rd Court order, which didn't do that, was invalid, the Supreme Court said.
5/9

Now it's too late to do anything, the court said.
1. Aug. 21 was the last day a candidate’s name could to be declared ineligible and omitted from the ballot.
2. But because the Aug. 21 deadline has now passed, "removal from the ballot is no longer a remedy."
6/9

Hence the court's order to reinstate the 3 candidates, putting the Green Party on equal footing with Libertarians who also did not pay the filing fee (the Supreme Court tossed out a GOP challenge to the Libertarians, first filed Aug. 21, as too late)
7/9

Ruling ends with a key principle:
"We recognize that changes to the ballot at this late point in the process will require extra time and resources to be expended by our local election officials. But a candidate’s access to the ballot is an important value to our democracy."
8/9

Read the ruling for In Re The Green Party of Texas here: txcourts.gov/media/1449733/…
9/9