Mark Ash
Libertarian | Texas
Candidate Profile
Moderate
BIOGRAPHY
EDUCATION
UT/El Paso, El Paso, TX, BSMT, 1985-
South Texas College of Law, Houston, TX, JD, 1992-
WORK & MILITARY
(Candidate did not provide)
AFFILIATIONS
(Candidate did not provide)
POLITICAL OFFICES HELD
(Candidate did not provide)
POLITICAL OFFICES SOUGHT
(Candidate did not provide)
OTHER INFORMATION
Mark Ash stated while running for Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Place 8 in 2018, “I will decide individual cases in an impartial manner based on the law and the facts and not political expediency.”
In 2022 Ash published an op-ed criticizing Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton and recommending Democratic candidate Rochelle Garza as the preferable choice to Paxton. Two days later, Ash requested a retraction of the article, stating that it was being “misinterpreted as an endorsement” of Garza.
In 2018, while seeking the Libertarian nomination for the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Mark Ash said the issues most important to him were civil liberties and criminal justice, including the Fourth Amendment right to privacy, Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination, due process, and preventing abuses of searches and seizures. He also supported jury nullification, arguing juries should be informed that they could find defendants not guilty when they believe a law is unjust, inhumane, or unconstitutional; advocated for mandatory police body cameras that remain turned on to increase transparency; and supported abortion rights.
QUESTIONNAIRE
RIGHT TO LIFE
Was Dobbs v. Jackson rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain. (Holding: In Dobbs, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the federal constitution does not confer a right to abortion.)
Yes. The constitution does not give women the right to have an abortion.
Does the federal Constitution support the right to physician assisted suicide? Please explain in light of Washington v. Glucksberg (1997).
no opinion
Human life deserves legal protection from conception until natural death.
Neutral
State law, not state or federal judges should decide issues involving abortion.
How do you view the judiciary’s role in matters of abortion regulation following Dobbs?
Neutral
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY
Do you believe religious liberty is at risk in the United States. If so, what is the judiciary's proper role in addressing this issue?
Maybe. The judiciary should protect the right to practice your faith as long as force, threats of force or fraud are not involved.
Does the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment require government to be strictly secular or does it allow for the nation's religious heritage?
Strictly secular. However the legislature can pass legislation based on religious principles that do not favor in any way one religion over another.
Was Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain. (Holding: The U.S. Supreme Court held tha the state may not show religious hostility when enforcing anti-discrimination laws against a business owner.)
Business owners are free to decide whether to offer their services, to whom they may offer their services and how they may offer their services so long as the use of force, threats of force or fraud is not involved in the business transaction.
VALUES
Briefly describe your spiritual beliefs and values.
none, I strongly believe in the principles of non-violence.
What is your understanding of parental rights under the Constitution regarding the upbringing of children, particularly regarding choices about education and sexual identity?
Parents should be able to decide the manner in which their children are brought up.
Is gender identity a protected class under the Constitution? Please explain the constitutional basis for your view.
The first amendment protects gender expression which may include gender identity.
ABOUT YOU
Have you ever been convicted of a felony? If so, please explain.
no
Have you ever been penalized for sexual misconduct in either civil or criminal court? If so, please explain.
no
I voted in these primaries and general elections:
2016 General Election 2018 General Election 2020 General Election 2022 Republican Primary 2022 General Election 2024 General Election
As a Libertarian, I have not voted in the Republican or Democratic primaries.
JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY
Describe your judicial philosophy.
Civil liberties especially the 1st, 2nd and 4th amendments must be protected.
Do you believe judges should primarily apply the law according to its original public meaning, or do you believe the law evolves over time to reflect contemporary values?
The law should be primarily applied according to its original meaning to the greatest extent possible.
Which current or past U.S. Supreme Court justice best reflects your judicial philosophy?
Every US supreme court justice influences the court to varying extents. No one justice reflects my individual philosphy
Was Obergefell v. Hodges rightly decided according to the text of the Constitution? Please explain. (Holding: The U.S. Supreme Court held Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses create a right for same-sex couples to marry.)
Same sex consenting adults should be granted the Equal Protections of the law. Married vs unmarried persons should also be granted equal protections under the constitution. The right to marry is a fundamental constitutional right. The right to equal protections of the law is a right applied to all individual adults.
A. How should a judge approach a case where the constitutional or statutory text is clear on its face? B. Conversely, how should a judge proceed when the text is ambiguous or silent on a disputed issue?
Apply the meaning of the law on its face as long as it does not violate the constitution.
What is your view of judicial restraint versus judicial activism? How do you define each?
Judges should practice restraint to the greatest extent possible.
What is the proper role of a judge?
Decide cases based on the law and the facts presented.
When applying or interpreting the text of a statute or constitutional provision, is it ever proper for a judge to consider present day public opinion or consequences?
No.
If precedent departs from the Constitution’s text or original meaning, should a judge follow it or correct the error? Please explain.
Maybe
CRIMINAL JUSTICE & PUBLIC SAFETY
The burden of proof in a criminal case is generally that the state must provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Some say the reason the burden of proof is so high is because we greatly value ensuring that the innocent are not unjustly imprisoned. Please comment on this topic.
The burden of proof is on the state to bring evidence of the crime committed. Persons are presumed not guilty unless and until the state proves by competent evidence by proof beyond a reasonable doubt of the person's guilt.
When reviewing wrongful conviction claims, what role, if any, should judges play in determining remedies?
Judge should examine the record to determine if the state presented sufficient competent evidence of the person's guilt.
2ND AMENDMENT
What is your understanding of the Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms?
The right to bear arms means that any person who is legally present in the US without a serious criminal record according to the law has the constitutional right to keep and bear fire arms. The legislature can limit the right to keep and bear firearms to certain immigrant classes such as permanent resident aliens and only to those persons who do not have certain misdemeanor or felony convictions. 2nd amendment's right to keep and bear firearms applies to all lawful persons .
OTHER IMPORTANT ISSUES
Which branch of government do you believe was intended to wield the most authority?
The executive branch enforces the will of the legislature, but the executive has discretion not to wield its authority.
