subject matter jurisdiction on Texas Appeals Journalhttps://texasappeals.org/topics/subject-matter-jurisdiction/Clinical descriptions of the Texas appellate decisions drawing the most press coverage.Hugo -- gohugo.ioen-usMon, 20 Jul 2026 07:00:00 -0500Fifth Circuit Affirms Denial of Intervention in United States’ Suit Over Texas In-State Tuition Provisionshttps://texasappeals.org/2026/07/united-states-v-texas-dream-act-intervention/Mon, 20 Jul 2026 07:00:00 -0500https://texasappeals.org/2026/07/united-states-v-texas-dream-act-intervention/The court held that intervention to defend two Texas Education Code provisions was futile because 8 U.S.C. § 1623(a) preempts them as to aliens not lawfully present, and dismissed the would-be intervenors’ remaining claims for want of appellate jurisdiction. Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez dissented.Court of Criminal Appeals Holds Convicting Court Lacked Jurisdiction Over Death-Row Inmate’s Constitutional Habeas Challenge to Execution Drugshttps://texasappeals.org/2025/10/ex-parte-speer-capital-habeas/Mon, 06 Oct 2025 07:00:00 -0500https://texasappeals.org/2025/10/ex-parte-speer-capital-habeas/In a per curiam opinion, the court held that a Bowie County district court had no jurisdiction over a constitutional habeas application seeking to bar the Texas Department of Criminal Justice from using allegedly expired and fire-damaged pentobarbital in a scheduled execution, because such an injunction would function as a stay of execution that only the Court of Criminal Appeals may grant. The court did not reach the merits of the method-of-execution claims.Court of Criminal Appeals, on Rehearing, Withdraws 2024 Opinion and Holds Ethics Commission Referral Is Not a Precondition to Election-Law Prosecutionhttps://texasappeals.org/2025/09/ex-parte-charette-rehearing/Mon, 08 Sep 2025 07:00:00 -0500https://texasappeals.org/2025/09/ex-parte-charette-rehearing/On the State’s motion for rehearing, the court withdrew its September 2024 opinion and affirmed the denial of pretrial habeas relief to a former judicial candidate. It held that neither the Texas Constitution nor Government Code Chapter 571 categorically bars a criminal prosecution for election-law offenses brought without a referral from the Texas Ethics Commission or exhaustion of its civil process, while reaffirming that the habeas claim was cognizable.Third Court of Appeals Dismisses Cities’ Challenge to Texas Regulatory Consistency Act for Lack of Standinghttps://texasappeals.org/2025/08/state-v-city-of-houston-hb-2127/Mon, 04 Aug 2025 07:00:00 -0500https://texasappeals.org/2025/08/state-v-city-of-houston-hb-2127/The court held that Houston, San Antonio and El Paso did not plead an injury-in-fact or an injury traceable to the State of Texas, reversed a trial-court judgment declaring House Bill 2127 unconstitutional, and dismissed the suit without prejudice. The court did not decide whether the Act is constitutional.