## Facts

- During a 2021 special session, several Texas House members left Texas to deny the House a quorum and prevent passage of voting legislation they opposed.
- The Texas Constitution provides that a smaller number than a quorum may “compel the attendance of absent members, in such manner and under such penalties as each House may provide.”
- The Texas House adopted a rule authorizing absent members to be “arrested” and their attendance “secured and retained.”
- After the House invoked its rule to compel attendance, the absent members sued the Governor and the Speaker in a Travis County district court seeking to prevent their arrest or confinement to compel attendance.
- The district court issued an ex parte temporary restraining order (TRO) barring the Governor and Speaker from detaining, confining, or otherwise restricting the members’ movement to compel their attendance.
- The Governor, the Speaker, and the State sought mandamus relief in the Supreme Court of Texas to require the district court to withdraw the TRO; the Supreme Court stayed the TRO pending review.

## Issues

1. Whether a district court may issue injunctive relief that interferes with the Texas House’s exercise of its constitutional authority to compel absent members’ attendance and prescribe penalties for nonattendance.
2. Whether mandamus relief was warranted to vacate the ex parte TRO.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Texas conditionally granted mandamus relief and directed the district court to withdraw the TRO.
- The Court held that the challenged judicial restraint improperly interfered with an internal legislative function textually committed to the House by the Texas Constitution.
- The Court concluded the trial court clearly abused its discretion by issuing the TRO and that relators lacked an adequate remedy by appeal given the time-sensitive interference with legislative operations.

## Legal Principles

- When the Texas Constitution textually commits a matter to the Legislature—here, compelling attendance of absent members “in such manner and under such penalties as each House may provide”—courts may not enjoin or control the Legislature’s exercise of that power in the course of internal proceedings.
- Judicial orders that restrain enforcement of House rules adopted to secure a quorum impermissibly intrude on separation of powers when they prevent the House from using constitutionally authorized attendance-compulsion mechanisms.
- Mandamus is available where a trial court’s order constitutes a clear abuse of discretion and no adequate appellate remedy exists, including when temporary injunctive relief disrupts ongoing, time-sensitive legislative functions.

## Conclusion

The Supreme Court of Texas held that the judiciary may not block the Texas House’s constitutionally assigned authority to compel attendance of absent members under its rules, and it granted mandamus to vacate an ex parte TRO that restrained enforcement of quorum-compulsion measures.


In re Abbott, 628 S.W.3d 288 (Tex. 2021)