Four seats on Texas’ highest civil court are up for grabs in November, giving voters a chance to weigh in on a judiciary that has been controlled by Republicans for decades.
The Texas Supreme Court doesn't usually attract the attention given to races for governor, Congress or the Legislature. But the nine justices who serve on the court make decisions that can affect nearly every Texan, from abortion restrictions and property rights to business lawsuits and the limits of government authority.
This November, voters will decide four seats on the court, including the chief justice position. All four Republican incumbents face Democratic challengers hoping to break the GOP's longstanding control of the state's highest civil court.
The races also feature a significant fundraising advantage for Republican incumbents, several candidates with close ties to Gov. Greg Abbott and Democratic challengers arguing that the court needs a broader range of legal experience and perspectives.
Here's what Texas voters should know before heading to the polls.
Why the Texas Supreme Court Matters
The Texas Supreme Court is the state's highest court for civil cases. Unlike the U.S. Supreme Court, it does not handle criminal appeals, which generally fall under the jurisdiction of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
Its nine justices serve six-year terms and are elected in partisan statewide elections. When vacancies occur before a term expires, the governor appoints replacements.
Abbott, himself a former Texas Supreme Court justice, initially appointed seven of the court's nine current members.
Republicans hold every seat, and Democrats have not won an election to the court since the 1990s.
The court's influence extends well beyond ordinary civil disputes. Justices interpret the Texas Constitution, determine whether state laws can stand and decide when government officials have exceeded their legal authority.
In recent years, the court has upheld Texas' near-total abortion ban and restrictions on gender-transition care for minors. It has also addressed election procedures, pandemic-era eviction policies and legal disputes involving government authority.
The court also establishes rules governing the state's judiciary, including guidance affirming that judges may decline to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies based on sincerely held religious beliefs.
With four seats on the ballot, the November election offers voters an opportunity to influence the court's direction for years to come.
Place 1: Chief Justice Jimmy Blacklock vs. Maggie Ellis
Jimmy Blacklock — Republican Incumbent
Chief Justice Jimmy Blacklock has served on the Texas Supreme Court since January 2018, when Abbott appointed him to the bench. He became chief justice in January 2025.
Before joining the court, Blacklock served as Abbott's general counsel and previously worked under him in the Texas Attorney General's Office.
A Yale Law School graduate, Blacklock also clerked for Judge Jerry Smith on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Blacklock is a conservative who emphasizes originalism, a judicial philosophy focused on interpreting constitutional language according to its original meaning.
Before becoming a justice, he worked on legal challenges involving the Affordable Care Act, Texas abortion restrictions and benefits for same-sex couples.
His campaign enters the election with a substantial financial advantage.
According to the supplied campaign finance figures, Blacklock had $783,574 in cash on hand as of June 30, after raising $381,700 during the first six months of 2026.
His major contributors include Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC, Hunton Andrews Kurth PAC and several other legal and business political committees.
Maggie Ellis — Democrat
Challenging Blacklock is Maggie Ellis, a justice on Texas' 3rd Court of Appeals who took office in January 2025.
Ellis brings a background in juvenile and family law, along with experience as an assistant district attorney, administrative law judge, public school teacher and foster parent.
Her campaign focuses on reducing political influence in the judiciary and improving access to justice.
Ellis has criticized the Texas Supreme Court's guidance allowing judges to decline to perform same-sex marriages, describing it as "an attack on our community and our Constitution."
She has pointed to that decision as a reason for entering the race.
Ellis reported $53,034 in cash on hand as of June 30, having raised $33,766 during the first half of the year.
Her contributors include Democratic Women of Comal County and individual donors from the legal community.
The central divide: Blacklock offers voters continuity with the court's conservative judicial philosophy, while Ellis argues that the judiciary needs greater independence from partisan politics.
Place 2: James Sullivan vs. Chari Kelly
James Sullivan — Republican Incumbent
Justice James Sullivan is seeking voter approval after Abbott appointed him to the Texas Supreme Court in January 2025.
Sullivan previously served as Abbott's general counsel and deputy general counsel. He also worked as an assistant solicitor general when Abbott was Texas attorney general.
A Harvard Law School graduate, Sullivan clerked for Judge Thomas B. Griffith on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Sullivan has openly embraced conservative judicial principles, promising "bold, relentless, conservative judging."
He has also said he would "run through a wall for the rule of law."
His campaign reported $590,381 in cash on hand as of June 30, with $317,601 raised during the first six months of 2026.
Major contributors include Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC and political committees associated with prominent Texas law firms.
Chari Kelly — Democrat
Democrat Chari Kelly brings a different legal background to the race.
Kelly has served on Texas' 3rd Court of Appeals since 2019. Before that, she worked as a felony prosecutor in Travis and Comal counties and as an assistant attorney general in the state's Civil Medicaid Fraud unit.
She also served as a staff attorney for the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
Kelly is an Army veteran who served as a paratrooper and captain in the Judge Advocate General's Corps, working as a defense attorney at Fort Hood and Joint Base San Antonio.
She describes herself as a "committed defender of the Constitution."
Kelly reported $105,425 in cash on hand as of June 30, after raising $57,056 during the first half of the year.
Several attorneys and law firm partners contributed $5,000 each to her campaign.
The central divide: Sullivan emphasizes conservative constitutional interpretation and his experience in state government, while Kelly highlights her appellate, prosecutorial and military legal experience.
Place 7: Kyle Hawkins vs. Kristen Hawkins
Two candidates sharing the same last name are competing for Place 7, but they bring notably different backgrounds to the election.
Kyle Hawkins — Republican Incumbent
Kyle Hawkins is the newest member of the Texas Supreme Court, appointed by Abbott in October 2025.
Before joining the bench, Hawkins served as Texas solicitor general from 2018 to 2021 and assistant solicitor general from 2017 to 2018.
His legal career includes private practice at Lehotsky Keller and Gibson Dunn, along with work connected to the Trump administration's Department of Justice transition.
Hawkins also clerked for Judge Edith Jones on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito.
As an attorney, he participated in major legal challenges involving the Affordable Care Act and Planned Parenthood and testified before Congress about constitutional questions surrounding the Voting Rights Act.
Hawkins reported $216,374 in cash on hand as of June 30, after raising $106,770 during the first six months of 2026.
His major contributors include Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC, Bracewell PAC and Valero PAC.
Kristen Hawkins — Democrat
Democrat Kristen Hawkins has served as a district court judge in Houston since 2017.
Her experience includes overseeing complex litigation and helping manage her court's response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
She has also been appointed to oversee multidistrict litigation proceedings, including lawsuits stemming from the Astroworld tragedy.
Before becoming a judge, Hawkins operated a private law practice focused on Social Security disability claims and handled delinquent property tax cases as a tax master in Harris County.
Her campaign emphasizes the importance of trial court experience on the state's highest civil court.
Hawkins argues that district judges bring valuable perspectives because they regularly apply appellate rulings and witness how those decisions affect litigants, attorneys and courtrooms.
She also strongly supports access to jury trials and believes appellate courts should exercise caution when overturning jury verdicts.
Kristen Hawkins reported $301,668 in cash on hand as of June 30, with $279,197 raised during the first half of 2026.
That gives her a fundraising advantage over the Republican incumbent based on the figures provided.
Her largest reported contributor was The West Law Firm, which gave $35,000.
The central divide: Kyle Hawkins brings experience arguing major constitutional cases, while Kristen Hawkins emphasizes the practical realities of trial courts and protecting jury decisions.
Place 8: Brett Busby vs. Gisela Triana
Brett Busby — Republican Incumbent
Justice Brett Busby has served on the Texas Supreme Court since Abbott appointed him in 2019.
Before joining the state's highest civil court, Busby served on Houston's 14th Court of Appeals from 2012 to 2018 and worked as an appellate attorney in private practice.
He also clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens and Judge Gerald B. Tjoflat of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Busby has connections to conservative legal organizations, including the Federalist Society, Alliance Defending Freedom and First Liberty.
Since joining the Supreme Court, he has also advocated for expanded access to legal services and improved civic education.
Busby has the largest campaign account among the eight candidates covered here.
He reported $1.3 million in cash on hand as of June 30, after raising $580,995 during the first half of 2026.
Major contributors include Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC, Vinson & Elkins Texas PAC and political committees associated with other major law firms and businesses.
Gisela Triana — Democrat
Democrat Gisela Triana is making another attempt to win a seat on the Texas Supreme Court after previously running against Busby in 2020.
Triana has served on Texas' 3rd Court of Appeals in Austin since 2019.
Her judicial experience dates back decades. She became a justice of the peace in 1994, later served as a county court-at-law judge and took office as judge of the 200th District Court in 2005.
During her previous Supreme Court campaign, Triana criticized the court's all-Republican membership, arguing that its decisions had become overly "result-oriented and beholden to special interests."
She also questioned the court's decisions allowing evictions and debt collection proceedings to resume during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Triana reported $128,786 in cash on hand as of June 30, after raising $9,425 during the first six months of 2026.
Her reported contributors include several Texas law firms and individual attorneys.
The central divide: Busby points to his appellate experience and work expanding access to legal services, while Triana offers decades of judicial experience and a critique of the court's political makeup.
Campaign Money Could Play a Major Role
Fundraising is one of the clearest differences between the candidates heading into November.
Based on the June 30 campaign finance figures, the four Republican incumbents collectively held approximately $2.89 million in campaign cash.
Their Democratic challengers collectively held approximately $589,000.
That gives Republicans nearly five times as much money available for campaigning.
The notable exception is Place 7, where Kristen Hawkins has more cash available than Republican incumbent Kyle Hawkins.
Political committees associated with major law firms, business interests and lawsuit reform organizations feature prominently among Republican contributors.
Democratic candidates have received financial support from individual attorneys, law firms and other donors.
The fundraising disparity could influence how effectively candidates communicate with voters in races that often receive limited media coverage.
What Happens Next?
Texas voters will decide these four Supreme Court races during the November 3 general election.
Republicans enter with the advantage of incumbency, established fundraising networks and decades of statewide electoral success.
Democrats, meanwhile, are presenting candidates with extensive experience in appellate courts, trial courts, prosecution and public service.
Even if Democrats win one or more seats, Republicans would retain control of the nine-member court. But a Democratic victory would end the party's decades-long absence from the bench and introduce a different perspective into the court's deliberations.
For voters, these contests deserve attention beyond the names and party labels appearing on the ballot.
The Texas Supreme Court has the final word on many of the state's most consequential legal disputes. Its decisions can shape how laws are enforced, how businesses operate and how Texans interact with their government.
