8th
TX SD 22: Secretary Of State Certifies Ballot With Birdwell
Check out this post: http://capitolannex.com/2010/04/08/tx-sd-22-secretary-of-state-certifies-ballot-with-birdwell/) The Texas Secretary of State’s office this morning certified the ballot for the coming special election in Senate District 22—in spite of complaints that Brian Birdwell, the candidate expected to give presumed front-runner former former State Sen. David Sibley, failed to meet proper residency requirements to run for the post. Gayle R. Avant and Darren Yancey are also on the ballot. Under the Texas Constitution, candidates for Texas Senate must have resided in Texas for five years prior to the date of the election for the post. At issue is Birdwell’s Texas residency. The Sibley campaign claims Birdwell voted in the 2004 General Election in Texas and Virginia. Birdwell says he voted in the 2004 Primary in Texas while on active duty in the U.S. Army and registered to vote in Virginia after retiring to vote against John Kerry in the general election. Sibley announced yesterday he would launch a full challenge to Birdwell’s candidacy. Interestingly, the law may not be on Sibley’s side on this. The “classic” election law case on residency in Texas is Mills v. Bartlett, 377 S.W.2d 636 Tex. Sup. Ct. (1964). In that case, the Court noted:
“The term ‘residence’ is an elastic one and is extremely difficult to define. The meaning that must be given to it depends upon the circumstances surrounding the person involved and largely depends upon the present intention of the individual. Volition, intention and action are all elements to be considered in determining where a person resides and such elements are equally pertinent in denoting the permanent residence or domicile.” Mills v. Bartlett, 377 S.W.2d 636 Tex. Sup. Ct. (1964)Though an old case, it has been cited many times since when dealing with the question of residency in cases ranging from election contests—even family law. I’m unsure how the current Secretary of State may interpret this in an administrative challenge—or how today’s Texas Supreme Court may interpret it, but residency in Texas election law has always been somewhat held as being in the eye of the beholder. It will be an interesting contest to watch.
