The interstate extradition clause of the Constitution requires charges of "Treason, Felony, or other Crime." This is not that. Honestly I hope some Texas Ranger goes to Chicago to try to execute some kind of civil arrest. They're going to end up locked in the Bean.
So is this Greg Abbott lying about the warrants for self-aggrandizement, or admitting that the House majority does whatever he orders?
Yes. Liar.
"Civil Arrest" is a thing so it's very much a "technically true" thing.
It's more of a "Governor orders" the arrests thing—it was by a vote of the House, with warrants signed by the Speaker. Governor doesn't order it, AFAICT.
Also, the vote of the House didn't have a quorum, so yeah ...
Texas law allows a legislative house to have members arrested to meet a quorum. So the lack of a quorum doesn’t prevent that.
Is it clear that the statute authorizing such civil arrest warrants is Constitutional under the Texas Constitution? What body is designated to enforce the warrants. Sincere questions. Looking for the statute.
The Texas & US Constitutions use the exact same language allowing each House to “compel the attendance of absent members, in such manner and under such penalties as each House may provide.”
Thank you. I appreciate the detailed response. I assume the manner provided for in Texas is set forth in the House rules and any penalizing statutes.
Here’s the Texas House rule allowing arrest of absent members when there’s no quorum
Very kind. Honestly, I was being lazy as I’m only using my phone. The excuse clause looks like an interesting escape clause if it leads to court action. I certainly understand the reason for the provisions and remember a similar showdown in Oregon recently with the roles reversed.
Theatre for dunces.
I'm kind of looking at that "they will face no civil or criminal charges" bit.
Damn straight! Chicago doesn’t play!
the bean needs more nourishment, let it be so.
Dude. Texas rangers definitely have NEVER found the bean. 👀
🤣🤣🤣
✅