The majority continues this Court's effort to shrink the role of
Ex parte Young, by overly narrow readings of the state officer's duty to enforce Texas's election laws. Unlike in
Okpalobi “where the defendants had no enforcement connection with the challenged statute,”
the Texas Secretary of State is the “chief election officer of the state” and is directly instructed by statute to “obtain and maintain uniformity in the application, operation, and interpretation of this code and of the election laws outside this code.”
Moreover, the Secretary is charged to “take appropriate action to protect the voting rights of the citizens of this state from abuse by the authorities administering the state's electoral processes” and “to correct offending conduct.”
Although recent decisions by this Court have split hairs regarding the level of enforcement authority required to satisfy
Ex parte Young,
the Secretary is charged to interpret both the Texas Election Code and the election laws outside the Code, including federal law, to gain uniformity, tasks it is clearly bound to do.
The allegation in these cases is that the Secretary is failing in that duty. This charge should satisfy our
Ex parte Young inquiry.