Commentary roundup: What newspapers around the state are saying

Houston Chronicle

Nov. 21 editorial, "This Texas law could make being a journalist a crime."

In April 2017, Villarreal broke the story about a Border Patrol agent who died by suicide. Like any diligent reporter, she first confirmed the employee’s name with the Laredo Police Department’s public information officer before publicizing it on her Facebook page. Eight months later, Villarreal was booked and charged for allegedly reporting information that had not yet been made public.

Villarreal’s arrest attracted national attention for the constitutional concerns it raised. The U.S. Supreme Court has time and time again established that the First Amendment protects the right to publish information obtained from government sources, even when the source of that information breaches confidentiality – as former military analyst Daniel Ellsberg famously did in 1971 with the Pentagon Papers – in disseminating it. That a local blogger would be arrested for publishing the name of a deceased public employee certainly appears to be, on its face, a blatant violation of this established judicial precedent.

A Texas state court judge agreed and tossed the charges against Villarreal in 2018, finding the statute “unconstitutionally vague.” But when Villarreal tried to sue the city of Laredo in federal court, a district court judge ruled that the officers and prosecutors were entitled to qualified immunity – a legal principle that shields government officials from being held personally liable for constitutional violations.

The Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals initially overturned that ruling and revived Villarreal’s lawsuit in a 2-1 decision. Judge James Ho, who was appointed by Republican President Donald Trump, wrote for the majority opinion: “It should be obvious to any reasonable police officer that locking up a journalist for asking a question violates the First Amendment.”

Yet Villarreal’s pathway to restitution hit yet another snag several weeks ago. On Oct. 28, the full Fifth Circuit said it would revisit the 2-1 decision “en banc” – meaning the court’s full 26-judge panel will weigh in on whether Villarreal obtained information “with an intent to benefit,” and as such, whether she has the right to sue the city of Laredo.

While we are hopeful that the full court will affirm its original decision and allow Villarreal’s lawsuit to proceed, the dissent from Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Priscilla Richman, who was on the panel for that decision, casts some doubt that the majority opinion will stand.

— Houston Chronicle Editorial Board

Dallas Morning News

Nov. 20 editorial, "GOP misread the Latino vote in South Texas."

The Texas GOP expected big wins with Latino voters in the midterm elections. Instead, they lost two out of three key congressional races in South Texas, where they invested heavily. So what happened?

The simple answer is that engaging voters is not an on/off switch. It takes time and hard work, and one election cycle is simply not enough. Making generic assumptions about the Latino vote in Texas didn’t help either.

Republicans got the messaging wrong, said Jason Villalba from the Texas Hispanic Policy Foundation. They thought that Trump populism would appeal to these voters and paid a price for it.

But it is worth highlighting that the Republican Party made its first serious outreach to Hispanic voters in Texas since the election of George W. Bush in the 2000s. Bush ran on a unifying message, in sharp contrast with Gov. Greg Abbott, whom many Latinos still find deeply divisive.

Abbott got 40% of the Latino vote, down from 42% four years ago, according to a CNN poll, despite betting big on this electorate.

Nationwide, Latino voters remained solidly Democratic, with 64% reporting that they voted for a Democratic House candidate, compared with 33% who voted for a Republican, according to the 2022 Midterm Election Voter Poll.

— Dallas Morning News Editorial Board

Fort Worth Star-Telegram

Nov. 18 editorial, "Sexually explicit books are one thing. But with latest vote, Keller ISD board goes too far."

Schools should be bastions of education but are increasingly playgrounds for politics. In the Fort Worth area, Southlake has gotten much of the attention, but Keller may be the bigger focal point now.

On Monday night, the Keller ISD board took the next step in cracking down on controversial books, voting to prohibit library books or instructional materials that discuss gender fluidity. Trustees have gone too far, way past policing obscenity and sexual content and more into denying gender fluidity and shutting down the entire discussion, even arguments from the conservative perspective.

Not only is that bad for students who may be struggling with these issues, its legality is dubious. The district is surely headed for a costly federal lawsuit.

The ban is broad and vague. Instead of targeting something that’s specifically egregious — like books aimed at young people containing explicit sexual content — it just wipes out any book that discusses gender fluidity at all, even if it’s introductory in nature.

While it’s true that few children and young people will seek out books on this theme, the handful that will may need the information and support found in the pages of a book describing gender fluidity.

And it’s too heavy-handed. Trustees could have restricted certain material by age. They could have allowed for a parental consent requirement. This smacks of an authoritarian response to a topic that makes many uncomfortable.

— Fort Worth Star-Telegram Editorial Board

San Antonio Express-News

Nov. 18 editorial, "Bexar County’s Take Responsibility program needs to end."

One of the most glaring problems with the Take Responsibility program is how it lessens potential penalties for repeat offenders. As state Rep. Andrew Murr, R-Junction, told the reporters, pleading down to obstructing a highway means “there is no first-time DWI offense.”

In turn, the second offense becomes the first offense in the eyes of the law, and the third offense becomes the second.

Consider the case of Joe Angel Garcia. About a year ago a drunken driver turned Garcia’s bike into “confetti.” Garcia now lives with a traumatic brain injury.

Perhaps it all could have been avoided if prosecutors hadn’t been so lenient with Lorenzo Caltzontzi-Jimenez, the driver who hit Garcia. In 2016, Caltzontzi-Jimenez was arrested on suspicion of drunken driving but pleaded to “obstructing a highway-intoxication.” A second arrest in 2019 was then treated as a first, resulting in more lenient penalties even though it was a case of “extreme intoxication.”

In the third incident, Caltzontzi-Jimenez pleaded guilty to intoxication assault. But Garcia now struggles to speak and walk.

— San Antonio Express-News Editorial Board

This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Austin American-Statesman Commentary Roundup: Nov. 27, 2022