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.

AOC Supports Massie’s ‘War Powers Resolution’ To Bar US From Israel-Iran War

New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez signaled that she will support a proposed bill from Kentucky Republican Rep. Thomas Massie called the “Bipartisan War Powers Resolution,” which would prohibit American involvement in the Israel-Iran war.

“This is not our war. But if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution. I’m introducing a bipartisan War Powers Resolution tomorrow to prohibit our involvement. I invite all members of Congress to cosponsor this resolution,” Massie declared in a post on X.

California Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna responded to Massie’s tweet by noting in a post that he is “proud to co-lead this bipartisan War Powers Resolution with Rep. Massie that is privileged and must receive a vote. No war in Iran. It’s time for every member to go on record. Are you with the neocons who led us into Iraq or do you stand with the American people?”

Ocasio-Cortez and Michigan Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib both indicated that they will support the move.

“Signing on,” Ocasio-Cortez wrote in response to Massie’s post.

“I look forward to supporting this War Powers Resolution,” Tlaib declared in a post. “The American people aren’t falling for it again. We were lied to about ‘weapons of mass destruction’ in Iraq that killed millions + forever changed lives. It’s unconst’l for Trump to go to war without a vote in Congress.”

However, Republican Representative Mike Lawler of New York, whom President Donald Trump endorsed for re-election in a post on Truth Social last month, has stated that he is not on board.

“If AOC and Massie are a yes, that’s a good bet that I’ll be a no. Iran, China, Russia, and North Korea are not our friends or our allies — in fact they are working to undermine us and destabilize the free world. A nuclear Iran will seek to eradicate Israel and all but ensure WWIII. We cannot allow that to happen. We must stand with Israel,” Lawler declared in a post on X.

Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, introduced a joint resolution on Monday which declares, ” … Congress hereby directs the President to terminate the use of United States Armed Forces for hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran or any part of its government or military, unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force against Iran.”

“It is not in our national security interest to get into a war with Iran unless that war is absolutely necessary to defend the United States. I am deeply concerned that the recent escalation of hostilities between Israel and Iran could quickly pull the United States into another endless conflict,” Kaine noted, according to a press release.

“The American people have no interest in sending servicemembers to fight another forever war in the Middle East. This resolution will ensure that if we decide to place our nation’s men and women in uniform into harm’s way, we will have a debate and vote on it in Congress.”

Late Monday, President Trump refuted reports that he had left the G7 summit in Canada early to work on an Israeli-Iranian cease-fire for something “much bigger.”

During an overnight journey back to Washington, Trump told reporters on Air Force One that he would meet with advisers in the Situation Room early Tuesday and that he was hoping to accomplish something more than a cease-fire.

“We’re looking at better than a cease-fire,” Trump said. “We’re not looking for a cease-fire. I didn’t say that I was looking for a cease-fire.”

When asked what was better than a cease-fire, Trump responded, “An end. A real end, not ceasefire. An end.” The president added that “giving up entirely” was also an option.

Biden Pardons For Cheney, Fauci, Others Could Backfire: Legal Expert

Former President Joe Biden granted clemency to a select group of individuals in a round of last-minute pardons aimed at shielding allies from potential reprisals by President Donald Trump, but the move is not without complications for the recipients.

Former Wyoming Republican congresswoman and Jan. 6 Committee co-chair Liz Cheney and Dr. Anthony Fauci were among the limited list of pardon recipients, a gesture Biden’s aides say was intended to preempt acts of vengeance by Trump or his administration.

However, legal experts were quick to point out that the pardons would not exempt either individual from having to testify under oath if subpoenaed.

Federal litigation attorney Jesse Binnall pointed out that Biden’s pardons do not shield Cheney and Fauci from consequences if they lie under oath, should the GOP-controlled Congress subpoena them to testify. In his words, the pardons could be “great news” for anyone seeking to see the two prosecuted.

“The pardons are actually great news. No one who was just pardoned will be able to refuse to testify in a civil, criminal, or congressional proceeding based upon the 5th Amendment,” Binnall wrote on X, before dropping another truth bomb.

“And let’s just be realistic. Most of these disgusting individuals would probably have to be charged in Washington, DC, which doesn’t convict partisan leftists,” Binnall, also a former attorney for President Donald Trump, wrote.

Other X users offered a potential solution to the problem of liberal bias in DC, including retired U.S. Army officer, lawyer, and author Kurt Schlichter.

“This is key – the depositions and the actual testimony must take place outside of Washington DC. Washington DC is a biased venue that will not convict Democrats when they commit perjury. Accordingly, take this show on the road,” he wrote.

Others who received pardons were former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman and Army Gen. Mark Milley, who later criticized Trump during his first term and al,l other members of the J6 committee.

Former Arizona state legislature candidate Josh Barnett (R) explained in a lengthy post on X that blanket presidential pardons don’t automatically cover every potential wrongdoing.

“A pardon typically grants forgiveness for a specific offense or set of offenses committed before the pardon was issued. However, if someone is found guilty of treason after receiving a pardon for previous crimes, the pardon does not extend to this new offense,” he said, perhaps a reference to Milley, who reportedly contacted his Chinese counterpart in the waning days of Trump’s first term and said he would “warn” him of any pending U.S. attack.

“A pardon only covers the crimes explicitly mentioned or implicitly understood to be covered by the pardon at the time it was granted. If the treason was committed or discovered after the pardon, it would not be protected by that pardon,” he added.

During a recent interview on Fox News, Trump told host Rachel Campos-Duffy that “I can’t even go after” figures from the January 6 investigation because of Biden’s pardons.

“Look the unselect Committee of political thugs–these horrible people–Democrats and two of the worst Republicans in history, crying Adam [Kinzinger] and Liz Cheney, two of the worst. They are just sick people. This was the committee. And it went for a year and a half,” Trump began.

“At the end of a year and a half, what did they do? They destroyed every piece of evidence they had because it came out totally on our side. Nancy Pelosi was responsible for the security. She knew that. She proclaimed it on her daughter’s tape. I mean, her daughter’s a videographer or whatever the hell she does. And she had Nancy complain, you know, saying, yeah, that she was responsible for it. Yes. They burned everything. And then Biden gave them all a pardon. These are congresspeople,” he said.

Trump continued, “These are people that are in Congress, not respected members, but they’re in Congress. If you did that in a civil thing. But think of it, they burned, deleted, and destroyed every single document after a year and a half because like the person that said, I grabbed this massive Secret Service agent around their neck and I was rebuffed. And then I went to the other one, and I think he was like, this big karate guy. And I went over there. And I had friends who say, ‘don’t ever change. It’s so cool.’ You know, I said, ‘no, I just want the truth.'”

“So they work for a year and a half, making everybody’s life miserable. They realized that they were guilty as – you know, all those secret agents, secret service agents, they honestly testified. They testified in a very honest way, and everything was wrong for them. And what, rather than exposing what they did, the criminal acts, they created a criminal act, and they did it like – a really good. But could you imagine if I deleted and destroyed all documents. And this is a hearing, a big deal that was set up that shouldn’t have been allowed to go forward. And, that’s it. So we can’t even go after them because they were pardoned,” Trump argued.