David J. Schenck
Republican | Texas
Candidate Profile*
Originalist
*Additional information appears below for educational purposes; however, only data received prior to the candidate deadline was considered during Panel Evaluation.
BIOGRAPHY
Name
David J. Schenck
Party
Republican
Election Year
2022
Election
Primary
Race
Justice, Supreme Court, Place 9
Incumbent
No
Links
EDUCATION
Baylor, Waco, JD, 1992
WORK & MILITARY
Candidate did not provide
AFFILIATIONS
Republican Lawyers of Dallas, Char, Highland Park Methodist
Member, Lawyers for 2008/2012 Presidential candidates, General Election Statewide Co-chair
Republican Party, Delegate to senate, state and national conventions
POLITICAL OFFICES HELD
Justice, Fifth Court of Appeals, 1/2015-present
Chair & Commissioner State Commission on Judicial Conduct, 2019-presnet
Deputy Attorney General, 2010-12
Commissioner, Texas Lottery, 2007-10
POLITICAL OFFICES SOUGHT
Candidate did not provide
Race
Previous Races
ENDORSEMENTS*
*These endorsements were received after the deadline and were not considered in the Panel Evaluations and are for additional educational purposes only.
CONSERVATIVE (5)
Bob Hall
Jeff Cason
Rodney Anderson
*Texas Eagle Forum
Texas Right to Life
REPORTED BY CANDIDATE (6)
Bob Hall
Angela Paxton
Brian Slaton
Jeff Cason
Rodney Anderson
SELECTED CONTRIBUTIONS
CONSERVATIVE
GIVEN BY CANDIDATE (18)
Alamo PAC (2010)
Angie Chen Button (2008)
Bob Hall (2015)
Dana Rohrabacher (2014)
Don Willett (2006)
RECEIVED BY CANDIDATE (6)
David Bridges (deceased) (2016)
Local, County, and District Republican Organizations (2016)
Republican Women's Organizations (2016)
Robert & Janice McNair (2016)
State Republican Party Organizations (2016)
LIBERAL
GIVEN BY CANDIDATE (0)
RECEIVED BY CANDIDATE (1)
Laborers International Union of North America (includes national, state & local affiliates) (2014)
OTHER INFORMATION
Governor Rick Perry appointed Justice Schenck to the Fifth District Court of Appeals in 2015. Source
Justice
Schenck dissented from the appeals court's decision to deny en banc
reconsideration in Dickson v. Afiya Center
(2021). This was a case in which a pro-life advocate
was sued for calling abortion "murder" and a "crime" (pp. 3, 11).
Justice Schenck
argued that relevant state law and the Free Speech Clause protected the
expression of vigorous pro-life rhetoric like this (pp. 6, 14). Justice
Schenck wrote that "further injecting the judiciary into that debate
[over abortion
issues] is inappropriate and inadvisable—particularly in a state that
has chosen partisan election of its appellate judiciary" (p. 10).
Justice Schenck wrote a concurring opinion in Winstead v. Moore
(2021), in which he raised concerns about a judge who was not assigned
to judge the Winstead case, delayed judgement of the Winstead case, and
quietly wrote an opinion in another case about the legal questions at
stake in the Winstead case (2-3). Justice Schenck suggested that the
judge would not have done this if he had fulfilled judges' "mandatory
obligation not even to sit in cases where they cannot resist actions
favoring a particular outcome relative to either the parties or the subject matter" (p. 5).
Justice Schenck wrote a concurring and dissenting opinion in Tarrant County College District v. Sims (2021). Justice Schenck disagreed with the court majority's holding that a state prohibition on sex discrimination included a prohibition on sexual-orientation discrimination (pp. 1-2). Justice Schenck wrote, "What matters, for our purposes, is what the law says and what the legislature understood it to mean at the time" (p. 7). Justice Schenck also quoted another case saying, "If judges could add to, remodel, update, or detract from old statutory terms inspired only by extratextual sources and our own imaginations, we would risk amending statutes outside the legislative process reserved for the people’s representatives. And we would deny the people the right to continue relying on the original meaning of the law they have counted on to settle their rights and obligations" (p. 12).
Other notable quotes from Justice Schenck's opinions:
- "Our primary objective is to give effect to the legislature’s intent, which we ascertain from the plain meaning of the words used in the statute, if possible." Dallas Central Appraisal District v. National American Education Federation (2020)
- "[W]e construe the statute’s words according to their plain and common meaning..unless such a construction leads to patently absurd results." Wood v. Lassiter (2019)
- "Our conclusion [about how to interpret the law] is further supported by the presumption that a just and reasonable result is intended." State v. Dallas Pets Alive (2018)
When Justice Schenck was a practicing attorney, he cowrote a pro-gun amicus brief in the case D.C. v. Heller (2008). Source
QUESTIONNAIRE
VALUES
I agree with Critical Race Theory (CRT) which asserts that the institutions in the United States are fundamentally racist.
Strongly Disagree
I believe that the equal protection clause of the constitution assures all Texans to equal treatment from its government and using the government to single out groups for mistreatment is wrong.
Judeo-Christian values established a framework of morality that is necessary for our system of limited government.
Strongly Agree
I recognize that the First Amendment forbids official state religions and requires equal treatment of all, but voters and office holders have the right to demand adherence to universal principles of right and wrong. I personally believe this country and its Constitution were gifts from God and proscriptions that judges and other office holders should follow an oath even when hurts and adhere to the rule of law — looking neither to the right or left — are not only anchored in scripture.
Briefly describe your spiritual beliefs and values.
I am a Christian, I am a member of Highland Park Methodist church for approximately 20 years and started attending Grace church in Plano during the pandemic. My religious beliefs are well stated in the Apostle's Creed and more fully elaborated in the Sermon on the Mount. I believe that life, this country and its Constitution are a gift from God and special trust on those fortunate enough to inhabit it and serve in its offices. I believe in tolerance, and that forgiveness and grace are gifts are our creator.
What types of pro bono work have you done?
I have worked to protect the second amendment, life and religious liberty, and the right of parents to raise their children in accordance with their beliefs subject only to the right to protect children from imminent harm. I have received the highest award from the Texas Bar, it's presidents award, for promoting access to pro bono legal services for the poor.
ABOUT YOU
Have you ever been convicted of a felony or been penalized in either civil or criminal court for sexual misconduct? If so, please explain.
No
What education or experience qualifies you to hold the office for which you seek election?
I graduated first in my class from Baylor Law School and am broad certified in civil appellate law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization.
Why should the voters choose you?
I have a proven record as a conservative constitutionalist who will stand up for an honest, independent court at a time when we can’t have anything less.
JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY
Justices should not interpret the federal and state constitutions as living documents, but should use a textualist and originalist approach to interpretation.
Strongly Agree
Judge made law is anarchy and a violation of the constructions requirement for separation of powers and a Republican form of government
What is the proper use of legislative history in interpreting statutory law?
To discern legislative intent only where the text itself is ambiguous
Which current or past U.S. Supreme Court justice best reflects your judicial philosophy?
Current is Sam Alito. Former Justice Scalia.
How should a court address the balance between public health and individual freedoms in the time of a pandemic?
It should follow the constitution and such statutes as has been enacted in keeping with it.
In light of the case Bostock v. Clayton County, in which the U.S. Supreme Court interpreted the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include a prohibition on sexual-orientation discrimination, which justice’s opinion most closely aligns with your own opinion?
Justice Alito’s. I’ve written on this at the state level in my dissent in Tarrant Community College v Sims.
What role (if any) does a judge have in maintaining the separation of church and state?
A judge is obliged to adhere to the Constitution and controlling decisions of superior courts interpreting it.
Religious liberty is at risk in the United States and deserves the highest level of protection in the law.
Strongly Agree
It’s assured to all Americans in the First Amendment and in the Texas Constitution.
When should a judge overturn past court decisions?
When they are clearly wrongly decided.
How should a judge determine which rights are protected by the Constitution even though they are not specifically mentioned?
If they aren’t mentioned they aren’t for the judge to recognize, lest the judge supplant the role of the people and other branches of government.
What legal principles should a court consider when evaluating parents’ objection to their child obtaining medical procedures or drugs designed to affirm the child’s desired gender?
The constitutional rights of BOTH parents to safeguard the long term interests of the child. I can’t speak further on an issue that is likely to come before me, but it’s obvious that taking irreversible steps on a child at the will of a single parent implicate the most serious concerns imaginable for the child’s best interest.
What principles should guide a court’s analysis of whether your state’s constitution gives terminally ill patients a right to assisted suicide?
The text of the constitution.
Would you describe your judicial philosophy as originalist, living constitutionalist, or something else?
I’m a textualist first, then if the text leaves room fir debate what the words would have meant to the writers at that time.
