in Re Steven Hotze, M.D., Hon. Allen West, Republican Party Of Texas, Hon. Sid Miller, Hon. Mark Henry, Hon. Charles Perry, Hon. Pat Fallon, Hon. Bill Zedler, Hon. Cecil Bell, Jr., Hon. Steve Toth, Hon. Dan Flynn, Hon. Matt Rinaldi, Hon. Rick Green, Hon. Molly White, Harris County Republican party/hon. Keith Nielsen, Hon. Bryan Slaton, Hon. Robin Armstrong, M.D., Jim Graham, Hon. Cathie Adams, Hon. Joann Fleming, Julie McCarty, Sharon Hemphill, and Al Hartman, 627 S.W.3d 642

Governor Abbott issued a July 27, 2020 proclamation invoking the Disaster Relief Act to suspend Texas Election Code §§ 85.001(a) and 86.006(a-1) and instructed that the Secretary of State take immediate notice; the proclamation stated it was made in consultation with the Secretary.
Relators (including candidates and party actors) filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel the Secretary of State to follow the Election Code’s statutory timing and procedures for early voting and to refrain from endorsing or implementing the Governor’s suspension.
The Secretary issued guidance to local election officials after the proclamation; Relators contend that guidance endorsed the Governor’s suspension and thus violated the Secretary’s statutory duties.
The Texas Supreme Court (majority) denied the petition as untimely and did not reach standing or the merits; Justice Devine dissented, arguing the Court should exercise mandamus power and grant relief.
Justice Devine emphasized precedent where the Court acted after statutory deadlines to protect elections, argued the Secretary has an enforceable ministerial duty as chief election officer, and called into question constitutionality of chapter 418 delegations.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Timeliness of mandamus petition	Relators: important electoral rights justify relief despite timing; Court has acted after deadlines before	Secretary: petition is untimely; dismissal required	Court dismissed petition as untimely and did not reach merits
Secretary of State's ministerial duty and availability of mandamus	Relators: Secretary has statutory duty as chief election officer and can be compelled to follow Election Code	Secretary: title alone imposes no ministerial duty regarding the proclamation	Not reached due to timeliness; dissent would have found a duty and granted relief
Validity/enforceability of Governor's proclamation under Disaster Relief Act	Relators: proclamation potentially unconstitutional and cannot expand Secretary’s statutory duties	Respondent: Governor lawfully suspended the statutes and Secretary acted accordingly	Not reached by the Court
Standing	Relators: candidates and impacted county judge have concrete injury and thus standing	Respondent: Court did not address standing because of timeliness	Not reached; dissent would find standing

In re Palomo, 366 S.W.3d 193 (Tex. 2012) (Court has acted after statutory deadlines to protect electoral process)
Bird v. Rothstein, 930 S.W.2d 586 (Tex. 1996) (declining to bar relief against Secretary of State on laches grounds in election matters)
Davis v. Taylor, 930 S.W.2d 581 (Tex. 1996) (election-related equitable relief after statutory deadlines)
LaRouche v. Hannah, 822 S.W.2d 632 (Tex. 1992) (election-dispute precedent)
Painter v. Shaner, 667 S.W.2d 123 (Tex. 1984) (election-remedy precedent)
In re Williams, 470 S.W.3d 819 (Tex. 2015) (mandamus may compel ministerial acts and correct clear abuses of discretion)
Anderson v. City of Seven Points, 806 S.W.2d 791 (Tex. 1991) (scope of mandamus relief against public officials)
In re Republican Party of Texas, 605 S.W.3d 47 (Tex. 2020) (discussion of Secretary of State duties and mandamus authority)