(Note: As I have done in past elections, I am running a series of Q&As for judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. This is intended to help introduce the candidates and their experiences to those who plan to vote in March. I am running these responses in the order that I receive them from the candidates. Much more information about Democratic primary candidates, including links to the interviews and judicial Q&As, can be found on Erik Manning’s spreadsheet.
Justice Meagan Hassan
1. Who are you and in which court do you preside?
My name is Meagan Hassan and I am currently a Justice on the Fourteenth Court of Appeals, Place 6.
2. What kind of cases does this court hear?
We handle appeals from every kind of trial court in our ten-county region. We review the record from the trial court, analyze whether any errors were made by the trial judge or the parties, and determine whether questions of law need to be decided or if there is already settled law that determines the outcome. We handle all kinds of cases – from evictions to capital murder, from custody issues to car accidents, from probate issues to large corporate contract disputes; the only things we don’t hear are appeals from death penalty cases and post-trial criminal habeas motions.
3. What have been your main accomplishments during your time on this bench?
The Fourteenth Court of Appeals is the most evenly divided appellate court in the state, with a complement of five Democratic justices and four Republican justices. This requires a great deal of negotiation among the panel members (three on a regular appellate panel; nine when the whole court sits together en banc). I have been responsible for 250 majority opinions from my own chambers, have written 19 concurrences and 30 dissents myself, and have also written three en banc decisions for the majority of the court (among the most that any intermediate Justice in Texas has written in the past five years). Since we were elected in 2018, we have managed to catch up on our previously backlogged docket and we are now deciding cases in a timely manner. I also have made a discernible difference in the jurisprudence of my court and the lives of people who live in this district. I can give you two examples of opinions I wrote where I worked hard to accomplish good for the community and the individuals involved:
The first was a criminal case involving a black man stopped by police in Waller County for a traffic violation. During the course of his 45-minute traffic stop, a burglary took place nearby. After releasing the man from the traffic stop, the officer learned of the burglary and went back to arrest the man for it. He was tried to a jury, convicted, and sentenced to 20 years in state prison. On appeal, I discovered the timeline of the traffic stop and the robbery created an impossibility: the man could not have committed the crime. I was able to convince my panel and write an opinion that reversed and remanded the case to the trial court and showed that he could not have committed the crime. The trial court then dismissed the case and the man was released from prison only 2 years into a 20-year wrongful sentence. August v. State, 588 S.W.3d 704 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2019, no pet.).
The second case was a parental termination case involving a Honduran immigrant who spoke limited English. When a neighbor called CPS to report her for neglecting her children, she cooperated fully with the investigation. The CPS investigator determined that the claims of neglect were untrue but asked her to take a drug test anyway. The test came back positive for trace amounts of drugs and her children were removed and put into foster care. She eventually could not complete the requirements of the family service plan (which was not provided to her in Spanish as required by law) and her rights to her children were terminated. On appeal, I wrote for an en banc court holding that our previous caselaw that permitted children to be removed from their parents when the parents tested positive for drugs *without any connection to abuse or neglect* was incorrect and reversed 20-year precedent of our court. The Texas Supreme Court thereafter declined to take the case. In re L.C.L., 599 S.W.3d 79 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2020, pet. denied) (en banc).
4. What do you hope to accomplish in your courtroom going forward?
Appellate justices work differently than trial court judges do. Because we work in panels of three (and sometimes all nine), we have to find common ground and work together to ensure the administration of justice not just for that case, but for the state of the law in the entire region. I will continue to work with my colleagues on both sides of the political spectrum to ensure justice is done for the people we serve.
5. Why is this race important?
These courts are incredibly important to the administration of justice in Texas as a whole. Around 90% of cases that are decided in the intermediate courts of appeals do not get reviewed by the Texas Supreme Court or the Court of Criminal Appeals, so we are the default court of last resort. It matters who we elect to these positions – we need justices who understand the way the law currently works and who have extensive experience (either as judges or litigators) so that we can fairly administer justice for the benefit of the people in our districts. These races are also under attack across the state by big-money interests from the top levels of the Republican Party because we have been so effective in the past five years.
6. Why should people vote for you in March?
I am proud of the work I’ve done in difficult cases on an ideologically divided court. I understand how important it is to work as a team in these positions – we are not single judges that work alone. The quality of the teammates matter and I have the experience and ability to make tough decisions and to follow them up with solid law that can convince my colleagues to join me.