City of El Paso and John F. Cook, in His Official Capacity as Mayor of El Paso v. Tom Brown Ministries, Word of Life Church of El Paso, Tom Brown, El Pasoans for Traditional Family Values and Ben Mendoza, 505 S.W.3d 124

In 2011 Tom Brown, Word of Life Church (WOL), and affiliated groups supported recall petitions targeting Mayor John F. Cook and two councilmembers; Cook sued Brown and others in his individual capacity alleging violations of Texas Election Code §253.094 (corporate participation in recall).
Appellees counterclaimed against the City of El Paso and Cook in his official capacity under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking damages, declaratory relief, and injunctive/pre-enforcement relief claiming suppression of core political speech.
This Court in Cook v. Tom Brown Ministries (385 S.W.3d 592) previously held WOL and others violated the Election Code and directed the City Clerk to decertify the petitions and cancel the recall election; the City complied by decertifying all three petitions.
Appellees later sought declaratory and injunctive relief against the City, alleging the City (and Cook as policymaker) ratified or caused unconstitutional enforcement; the City moved to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction/standing.
The trial court denied the plea to the jurisdiction; on interlocutory appeal, the court of appeals held Appellees lacked standing because (1) Cook sued in his individual capacity (not under color of law), (2) the City’s actions were compelled by this Court’s mandate (ministerial compliance), and (3) there was no credible threat the City could or would enforce the Election Code against Appellees.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Appellees have standing to sue the City under §1983	City ratified Cook’s suit / Cook acted as final policymaker so City caused injury	Cook sued only in his individual capacity; City had no authority to enforce Election Code and did not cause injury	No standing; dismissal granted
Whether City’s decertification and cancellation were municipal policy causing §1983 liability	City officials (City Clerk, Council, Mayor) acted as policymakers when they decertified and cancelled election	Actions were ministerial compliance with this Court’s mandate, not discretionary municipal policy	Not a moving force; no municipal liability
Whether Appellees can obtain pre-enforcement relief against the City re: Election Code	Appellees fear future enforcement and seek declaratory/pre-enforcement review	No credible threat: City lacks authority to prosecute or enforce Election Code; fear is speculative	No standing for prospective relief; pre-enforcement claim fails
Whether declaratory relief against the City is justiciable	Declaration needed to resolve constitutionality and prevent future suppression	No live controversy because alleged injuries trace to Cook (individual) and not to City action; DJA cannot create jurisdiction	Declaratory claim dismissed for lack of justiciable controversy

Cook v. Tom Brown Ministries, 385 S.W.3d 592 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2012) (prior appellate decision ordering decertification of recall petitions)
Heckman v. Williamson Cty., 369 S.W.3d 137 (Tex. 2012) (standing and plea to the jurisdiction standard)
Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (U.S. 1992) (three-part constitutional standing test)
Monell v. Dept. of Social Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658 (U.S. 1978) (municipal liability requires action pursuant to official policy)
Connick v. Thompson, 563 U.S. 51 (U.S. 2011) (municipality liable only for its own illegal acts and official policy as cause)
Pembaur v. Cincinnati, 475 U.S. 469 (U.S. 1986) (policymaker acts and municipal policy definition)