GREEN vs GREEN - Texas Supreme Court Place 5
by Sonja Harris on February 12, 2016 at 1:28 PM
Why would anyone run for public office against someone with the same last name if only to purposely confuse and exploit the public? This is exactly what Rick Green, with no judicial experience and a tainted history, appears to be doing. He is challenging long standing, conservative Justice Paul Green, a stalwart jurist on the Texas highest court, the Supreme Court.
In my quest to bring you information and knowledge on some candidates, I do a tremendous amount of research. Some candidates require very little exploration, whereas other candidates require an immense amount of time to do the required research to show evidence of their qualifications and character. Researching ‘character’ is a lot more difficult since you cannot rely solely on word of mouth, at least you shouldn’t; concrete evidence is always best to expose the truth. This election cycle has brought out some dubious characters campaigning in important races for which they not only lack experience, as in this case, but also do not have the judicial temperament to sit in the Texas Supreme Court. Judicious simply means using or showing judgement as to action or practical expediency: discreet, prudent or politic.
Justice Green has an opponent, Rick Green, that is very comfortable, and happy as a radio host and travelling for Wallbuilders, but has decided that the Supreme Court needs a ‘Constitutional Watchdog’. Since Rick Green does such an excellent job in his present career it is amazing that he would step out and challenge a well-qualified jurist without any judicial experience of his own. As far as most Texans and Justice Paul Green are concerned, each Justice on the Supreme Court of Texas are probably the most conservative in the United States and follow the law and are well adept at critical thinking on constitutional law. So basically Rick Green, who has absolutely no experience as a judge and with a tainted history, wants to be the ‘Constitutional Watchdog’ of the highest court in the state on civil matters.
The main issue in the race is the State vs Naylor case of two women who married in Massachusetts and decided to not be married in Texas. Eight of the nine justices participated with three dissents. Paul Green joined in the majority opinion. The majority opinion dismissing the lawsuit was based on lack of jurisdiction, a procedural matter, that had nothing to do with the central question of the constitutionally of the Texas Marriage Laws. The decision shows that the court exercised judicial restraint and did not engage in judicial activism. Please read the article by Justice Brister and Justice Wainwright.
Researching Rick Green was shocking to say the least. That a man wanting to sit on the highest court in the state would have so many issues in his past is appalling. One that really struck me was the case where he filed a lawsuit for defamation. In 2010, Green had run against another justice and lost. He then sued the winner’s supporters for circulating a letter outlining reasons why Green should not be elected. The Defendants were: Thomas Phillips, former Texas Supreme Court Justice, The Texas Tribune, INC, Texas Association of Realtors Political Action Committee to name a few. How could a ‘Constitutional Watchdog’ sue anyone for exercising their right to Freedom of Expression? Did he not know the oldest principle: truth is always a defense to an accusation of libel or slander? This action alone should give the voter pause as to his judgement. For additional information follow this link http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/tx/phillips_answer.pdf.
CAUSE NO: 11-0742
DEFENDANTS’ FIRST AMENDED ORIGINAL ANSWER
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
In speaking to Rick Green and in fairness to him I am adding the AGREED ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Apparently Rick Green’s tenure in the Texas legislature from January 1999 to January 2003 was not without ‘situations’ as Exhibit A makes reference to his time as representative for HD46. The case was dismissed after mediation between Rick Green and the Defendants. It was dismissed with ‘prejudice’, meaning that the case cannot be filed again.
We regret that language we used in the 2010 election regarding Rick Green may have created an inaccurate perception that representative Green has been officially censured by the legislative body of which he served. No such censure took place, and we regret any confusion caused for the voters and any perceived damage to Representative Green’s reputation caused by using the word censure to describe criticism of Representative Green.
Justice Paul Green graduated from St Mary’s University Law School in 1977. He was a Justice for the Fourth Court of Appeals in his home town of San Antonio for 10 years before being elected to the Supreme Court in 2004. Justice Paul Green and his wife, Courtney, belong to Trinity Baptist Church in San Antonio, Texas. Paul Green has three sons, Paul, John and Ethan and four grandchildren. Two of his grandchildren are school age and are being homeschooled.
Justice Paul Green is a conservative jurist who will uphold the integrity of the Supreme Court and be prudent in his opinions. At a period when our country is experiencing an abundance of lawlessness, this is not the time to elect a 'Constitutional Watchdog' that has no judicial experience and a history of unethical behavior. Texans must not mock our Texas Supreme Court by electing an injudicious Rick Green.
State v. Naylor — A Debate among Conservatives on the Texas Supreme Court
By Scott A. Brister & Dale Wainwright February 1, 2016 2:08 PM
For Supreme Court
Republicans should back incumbents against unqualified challengers.
Lehrmann, Paul Green and Guzman merit continued GOP support