Voting is the foundation of freedom. The Democratic Party needs to support legislation and policies that support the voting rights of all citizens. We call upon the Federal Government to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act and the Freedom to Vote Act.

The undersigned denounce the attempt to disqualify a leading candidate for Texas Democratic Party (TDP) Chair. We respect the State Democratic Executive Committee (SDEC) Nominations Committee’s report certifying that all candidates are qualified to run for TDP Chair and call for unadulterated democracy when choosing between the candidates.

1. The opinion is non-binding. The SDEC asked its Nomination Committee to create a slate of candidates. Nominations did so and found no issues with Kendall's candidacy. The opinion of the TDP General Counsel is not binding upon the SDEC. Some could see it as an intrusion upon its authority, as no SDEC vote empowered the General Counsel to craft this opinion.
   
2. The opinion is wrong (literally). Originally, the Nominations Committee was advised that Kendall was eligible to run. Suddenly, the counsel offered this opinion while misnaming the candidate’s office by repeatedly calling the office the “Dallas County Appraisal District” when it’s the “Dallas CENTRAL Appraisal District.” Furthermore, DCAD, or any other Central Apprisial District, is not a part of county or state government as per the Texas Comptroller. It is not a part of county government, nor is it a part of state government. It is a local authority board, similar to a school district or college board.
3. This is not an issue of law but of party rules. According to Roberts Rules, the SDEC is the ultimate judge on who is and is not eligible. The SDEC Nominations Committee made its decision with proper guidance. No single member or outside entity can override the Nominations Committee. It should be up to the SDEC to define what constitutes a county or state government under TDP rules, not an outside entity, to prevent the sudden “changing of definitions” to be weaponized against Democrats in the future.
4. They are cherry-picking the rules. The law and TDP rules clearly state that the chair and vice-chair must be of different genders. The current vice chair is female, meaning the chair must be either male or non-identifying. On Nov 13th, counsel advised that the law can be ignored -- until recently, when the counsel said the "gender balancing law" can still be ignored but the vague parts "can't be a member of county or state government" rule needs to be hapazardly enforced. If this were a compulsion to follow the rules, the female candidates would be disqualified too. This isn't about following rules; rather, it's about playing political games. 
5. This decision may cause a mass exodus from the Party. If we are forced to remove one candidate for party office for holding a local, nonpartisan position, this precedent will likely be weaponized against other Democrats, causing significant long-term damage. This may not happen immediately, but it creates a precedent. Again, such rules must be determined democratically, not by an opinion parading as a decree.
6. Many of us have heard from countless activists, delegates, and donors that folks are fed up and disappointed with how the Party has conducted its business. The 2022 and 2024 Conventions, in particular, left many feeling disillusioned and disenfranchised, and we have grave concerns that following through with this action would add substantial fuel to the fire and vindicate their concerns.
7. The logic that a candidate must preemptively resign is flawed. Whichever candidate wins, we support the idea that the winner should possibly quit, resign, and/or go on a sabbatical from most other positions or offices to better focus on the TDP chair position and avoid conflict of interest or distraction. We do NOT want to ask any candidate for TDP Chair to resign preemptively, as that would cause more harm than good to the Party as a whole. Due to Roberts Rules, the SDEC can make this determination.
8. This matter extends beyond a single candidate; it’s about democracy. Our democracy in government has been replaced by oligarchy. Is the same true for the Texas Democratic Party? Debate is fundamental to democracy, but silencing opposition paves the way for oligarchy. You can support whoever you think is best, but no one member or entity has the right to strip that choice away from others. 
9. Reclaiming the Party for the People. The SDEC is the elected body that represents the grassroots base of our party. For a long time, the SDEC has been treated as a rubber stamp to approve backroom deals. But the more the SDEC tries to regain its power, the more they try to strip choices away from the SDEC. This has happened repeatedly -- in 2022, 2024, and now 2025. The Party must stop operating on backroom deals. Let the people vote.

Either the Democratic Party is the party of democracy, or what are we? If not a democracy, then what.