the Texas Education Agency Mike Morath, Commissioner of Education in His Official Capacity And Doris Delaney, in Her Official Capacity v. Houston Independent School District, 660 S.W.3d 108

Background

TEA appointed Dr. Doris Delaney in 2016 as a conservator to address chronic failures at Kashmere High School; she later issued a directive pausing HISD’s superintendent search.
Wheatley High School had multiple unacceptable ratings; the Commissioner warned closure or appointment of a board of managers might follow.
TEA’s Special Investigations Unit (2019) reported Open Meetings Act violations and governance failures, recommending lowering HISD’s accreditation and appointing a board of managers.
HISD sued in state court seeking an ultra vires injunction; the trial court enjoined the Commissioner and conservator, and the court of appeals affirmed.
While the case was pending, the 87th Legislature (SB 1365) amended the Education Code to (a) make campus and district conservator powers coextensive, (b) permit appointment of a board of managers after two consecutive years with a conservator assigned, and (c) revise investigation and review procedures.
The Texas Supreme Court evaluated the injunction under the new law, held HISD had not shown a probable right to relief, vacated the temporary injunction, reversed the court of appeals, and remanded for further proceedings.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a campus conservator may exercise district-level powers	Conservator appointed for a campus is limited to campus-level authority and cannot be expanded to district governance	Commissioner may define conservator duties and expand role; no strict campus/district split	Under the new statute conservators may exercise coextensive powers regardless of original appointment; District failed to show ultra vires conduct
Whether a board of managers may be appointed based on Delaney’s conservatorship and campus ratings (Wheatley)	Appointment unlawful because prerequisites under prior law (e.g., consecutive ratings, district-level conservator) were not satisfied	Current law permits board appointment if a conservator was assigned for two consecutive years or other statutory triggers are met	New law removes the campus/district distinction and allows appointment after two consecutive years with a conservator; HISD did not show a probable right to relief
Validity of TEA’s accreditation investigation review (Cottrill’s informal review)	Informal review required the commissioner or a designated hearing examiner; delegation to Cottrill was invalid	Commissioner may delegate ministerial/executive functions to staff; delegation here was authorized	Delegation to Cottrill was authorized; additionally, new procedural reforms apply prospectively to investigations finalized on/after Sept. 1, 2021
Appropriateness of temporary injunction under ultra vires framework	Planned TEA actions exceed statutory authority and should be enjoined prospectively	Under current law TEA’s planned actions are authorized; injunction not warranted	Because the Legislature changed the controlling law and HISD did not demonstrate a probable right to relief under that law, the injunction was vacated and the case remanded for further development

Key Cases Cited

Chambers-Liberty Cntys. Nav. Dist. v. State, 575 S.W.3d 339 (Tex. 2019) (permits ultra vires claims seeking prospective compliance)
City of El Paso v. Heinrich, 284 S.W.3d 366 (Tex. 2009) (ultra vires suits seek prospective relief to enforce statutory limits)
In re Texas Educ. Agency, 619 S.W.3d 679 (Tex. 2021) (addressed appellate temporary relief in related TEA action)
Honors Acad., Inc. v. Tex. Educ. Agency, 555 S.W.3d 54 (Tex. 2018) (scope of judicial review in ultra vires challenges to agency action)
Abbott v. Anti-Defamation League Austin, Sw. & Texoma Regions, 610 S.W.3d 911 (Tex. 2020) (lack of probable right to relief is dispositive on preliminary injunction)
Butnaru v. Ford Motor Co., 84 S.W.3d 198 (Tex. 2002) (elements required for issuance of a temporary injunction)
Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833 (Tex. 1992) (standard of review for legal determinations on appeal)