dx A high-stakes showdown has hit the Texas Supreme Court as the push to remove Democratic lawmakers who fled the state moves forward. What began as a quorum fight has escalated into a battle over political power, protest, and the limits of legislative authority. The court’s decision could set a precedent that reshapes Texas politics for years—and its impact will reach far beyond this single case.

Texas House Democrats made national headlines this summer when they fled the state to stall a vote on a new congressional map that would help Republicans pick up 5 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Republican Gov. Greg Abbott petitioned the Texas Supreme Court to remove their caucus leader from office.

Now, that high-stakes case is before the Texas Supreme Court and could set a precedent for any lawmaker in the future who attempts to flee the state to avoid voting on a measure.

Abbott touted the court’s decision as a victory, posting on social media that the briefing schedule brings the “ring leader of the derelict Democrats … closer to consequences.”

The Court has combined Abbott’s lawsuit against Houston Rep. Gene Wu, chair of the House Democratic Caucus, with a similar case brought by Attorney General Ken Paxton, who seeks to oust Wu along with 12 other Democratic members.

Although Abbott and Paxton initially disagreed over which office had the legal authority to file such suits, Paxton said that he now looks forward to working alongside Abbott to “hold these cowards accountable.”

On Aug. 3, dozens of House Democrats left Texas to halt the Legislature and block passage of the GOP’s proposed congressional map. The redistricting push came under pressure from President Donald Trump, who has called for adding five Republican seats to bolster the party’s slim House majority ahead of the 2026 midterms.

As the minority party, their only viable tactic to derail the map is to break quorum—refusing to attend sessions so the chamber lacks the numbers needed to move legislation forward.

Wu’s attorneys contend that by leaving the state, he is acting in accordance with the will of his constituents, aiming to block the passage of legislation they oppose, the outlet noted.

Wu “has not died and has not been expelled from the House by the constitutionally prescribed means: a 2/3 vote of the House,” his lawyers said in a brief. “His presence in another state is not a voluntary resignation — as his opposition to this petition makes evident.”

The Texas Supreme Court is composed entirely of Republicans, with two-thirds of its members initially appointed by Governor Abbott. Among them are two justices — including the chief justice — who previously served as Abbott’s general counsel.

“They have their own independent authority, of course, but it does put them in a tough political position,” Andrew Cates, an Austin-based attorney and expert on Texas ethics law, told The Texas Tribune in an earlier interview. “They don’t want to be in the position of potentially biting the hand that initially fed them.”

This also comes as the U.S. Supreme Court recently got involved after Texas eventually passed the new map to give Republicans 5 U.S. House seats.

Texas’ newly redrawn Republican-friendly congressional map is back in place, at least for now, after Justice Samuel Alito temporarily restored the map while the full U.S. Supreme Court considers whether a lower court was correct in striking it down.

The map is expected to net Republicans up to five additional seats in the 2026 midterm elections if it remains in place, Politico reported.

Alito’s order allows Texas officials to continue preparing for primary elections under the GOP-backed map. The move came shortly after the state asked the justices for an emergency ruling to revive the redistricting plan championed by President Donald Trump.

Texas filed the appeal late Friday and asked the court to pause a lower court ruling that found the map was likely based on unconstitutional racial considerations.

The petition formally asked the high court to intervene in a case that could help decide control of the House in the next midterm cycle.

A longer-term ruling restoring the map would make it far harder for Democrats to regain a majority.