Summary
The Supreme Court of Texas conditionally granted mandamus relief concerning the Fifteenth Court of Appeals’ stay of enforcement of reporting rules promulgated by the Texas Attorney General for local prosecutors. The Court held that the appellate court was required to make a preliminary assessment of the likely merits before issuing temporary relief under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 29.3. The Court directed the court of appeals to reassess whether a stay was warranted by January 5, 2026, and stated that the writ would issue only if the court failed to do so.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Attorney General's interlocutory appeal automatically superseded the district court's temporary injunction under Texas law.
- Whether the Fifteenth Court of Appeals could issue a Rule 29.3 stay preserving injunctive relief against the government without conducting a preliminary inquiry into the likely merits of the underlying legal challenge.
- Whether the court of appeals' stated reluctance to determine likely success on the merits satisfied the required standard for temporary relief pending appeal.
Holdings
- Because the State and its departments are exempt from filing an appeal bond and have a statutory right to supersede judgments or orders, the Attorney General's interlocutory appeal automatically superseded the district court's temporary injunction.
- An appellate court considering temporary relief pending appeal under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 29.3 must make a preliminary inquiry into the likely merits of the parties' legal positions.
- The court of appeals' statement that it was reluctant to decide who was likely to succeed on the merits did not satisfy Rule 29.3 because the court did not conduct the required preliminary legal analysis.
Key quotations
“A stay pending appeal is, of course, a kind of injunction,” (at 3)
“The relevance of the merits to requests for injunctive relief does not vanish when courts must rule expeditiously.” (at 4)
“Any judicial interference with the executive branch’s desired course of action should always be premised, at least in part, on judicial analysis of whether that course of action is within the executive’s legal authority.” (at 4)
Factual background
The Attorney General promulgated reporting requirements for local prosecutors under 1 Texas Administrative Code sections 56.1-.10. Counties and local prosecutors challenged the rules, asserting that they imposed substantial burdens and exceeded the Attorney General's statutory authority. After the district court issued a temporary injunction, the Attorney General appealed, but the Fifteenth Court of Appeals issued a Rule 29.3 stay that continued the injunction as to the named appellees without conducting a meaningful preliminary assessment of the parties' likely success on the merits.
Procedural history
A group of counties, county attorneys, and district attorneys sued to challenge reporting rules promulgated by the Attorney General, and the district court issued a temporary injunction against enforcement. The Attorney General took an interlocutory appeal, which automatically superseded the injunction. The Fifteenth Court of Appeals nevertheless issued a Rule 29.3 stay leaving the temporary injunction in place as to the named appellees. The Supreme Court of Texas conditionally granted mandamus and directed the court of appeals to conduct the required preliminary merits analysis by January 5, 2026.
Remand instructions
The Fifteenth Court of Appeals must evaluate the merits and determine by January 5, 2026, whether a stay under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 29.3 is warranted. The Supreme Court's writ commanding vacatur of the court of appeals' temporary-relief order will issue only if the court of appeals does not comply.