Gov. Greg Abbott’s office told the Texas Supreme Court this week that two recent developments strengthen its bid to remove state Rep. Gene Wu from office, while Wu and the Texas House Democratic Caucus pushed back by defending last year’s quorum break and criticizing the fines process.
In an April 14 letter filed in In re Abbott, Abbott’s general counsel, Trevor Ezell, told the court that the U.S. Supreme Court’s April 9 denial of certiorari in Ronan v. LaRose and a Texas House committee vote fining Wu for breaking quorum both reinforce the governor’s position. Ezell argued those developments undercut Wu’s claim that the walkout reflected a lawful exercise of constitutional power.
As previously reported by The Dallas Express, Abbott has for months pressed the Texas Supreme Court to remove Wu from office over the 2025 redistricting walkout, when House Democrats left the state to deny Republicans a quorum. Abbott has argued that Wu, the House Democratic Caucus chair, abandoned the duties of his office. Wu has argued the quorum break fell within his rights as a legislator and served the people he represents.
Wu made that argument in a statement circulated on social media this week: “I don’t answer to Greg Abbott — I answer to the people of Texas,” Wu said. He also stated that he was “exercising my rights as a legislator” by denying quorum and called Abbott’s case a “bogus lawsuit.”
The governor’s office also pointed to action taken by the House Administration Committee on April 10. In the new filing, Ezell said the committee found Wu liable for breaking quorum and voted to impose monetary fines, which Abbott’s office says further shows Wu’s conduct was punishable rather than constitutionally protected.
House Democrats gave a sharply different account. In a caucus statement issued after the hearing, Democrats said Republican leaders produced key cost records at the last minute and forced members to respond to financial claims with insufficient time for review.
Wu said, “We made the decision to break quorum to defend fair representation for Texans, and we would make that same decision again.”
The dispute extends beyond the fines themselves to how those penalties may be paid.
Abbott’s filing cited public remarks in which Wu said quorum breakers would fundraise to pay the fines. The filing quoted Wu as saying, “State law says any cost of a political process, a political cost of your office, can be reimbursed by campaign. State law trumps the House rules, period, right? There’s no mincing words about that. It’s just flat out, that’s the law.”
Wu: “State law says any cost of a political process, a political cost of your office, can be reimbursed by campaign. State law trumps the House rules, period, right? There’s no mincing words about that. It’s just flat out, that’s the law.”
— Renzo Downey (@RenzoDowney) April 10, 2026
House rules adopted for the 89th Legislature say otherwise. Rule 5, Section 3(f) states that a member fined for an unexcused absence may not pay that amount “from funds in the member ’s operating account or from funds accepted as political contributions under Title 15, Election Code.” The same section authorizes a $500 fine for each calendar day of absence and a member’s pro rata share of costs incurred to secure attendance.
Wu also used social media to solicit campaign support after the House action. In a Facebook post, Wu said Republicans had voted to fine Democrats for breaking quorum and asked supporters to help him continue the fight, linking donors to an ActBlue fundraising page.
Abbott’s filing goes further than the procedural dispute. Ezell accused Wu of accepting “bribes” in exchange for breaking quorum and of pocketing roughly $2 million connected to the fight. Those claims appear in Abbott’s filing as litigation allegations, not as new factual findings by the court.
The Texas Supreme Court has not yet ruled on Abbott’s request to remove Wu from office.