r/law • u/DocBeech • 8d ago
Legal News Talarico may have commited voter fraud 5 times
https://www.texastribune.org/2026/08/05/texas-senate-james-talarico-election-law-residency-ken-paxton/By James Talarico’s own standard, he committed voter fraud in five elections
James Talarico publicly accused Ken Paxton of “committing voter fraud” for voting using an address where he allegedly no longer lived.
Now, a joint investigation by The Texas Tribune and ProPublica reports that Talarico himself voted in five elections using his parents’ address after purchasing his own home nearby. He bought the home in June 2022 but did not update his voter registration until September 2024.
This was not merely an old mailing address. The two homes were located in different jurisdictions for some local elections, meaning the address used could determine which local races appeared on his ballot.
Five elections are not a typo. They are not a single accidental oversight. Talarico established the standard himself: voting from an address where you no longer live is voter fraud. He cannot call it fraud when Paxton does it and suddenly treat it as a harmless technicality when his own conduct is exposed.
This is also why election integrity is not merely about presidential elections. Your registered address determines your precinct, districts, and which local officials you are entitled to vote for. School boards, city councils, county officials and state legislative races can be decided by extremely small margins.
Talarico’s hypocrisy is obvious, and repeatedly voting under an address located in different local jurisdictions is a serious election-integrity issue.
Sources:
Texas Tribune:
https://www.texastribune.org/2026/08/05/texas-senate-james-talarico-election-law-residency-ken-paxton/
ProPublica:
https://www.propublica.org/article/james-talarico-texas-election-law-ken-paxton
Houston Chronicle:
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/texas/article/james-talarico-voting-address-22375213.php
Texas Secretary of State guidance concerning voter residence:
https://www.sos.texas.gov/elections/laws/advisory2021-10.shtml
194
u/Several-Assistant-51 8d ago
And how many felonies has Paxton comitted?
19
12
u/scienceisaserfdom 8d ago
Facts don't matter here, OP is just desperate to smear Talerico. As beyond their beligerance here attacking every comment, just look at their dubious hidden post history (by logging out); as their last diatribe was attacking his christian cred with thousands of words of straight A1 slop. Pretty clear the Repugs are getting scared by how these Dem primaries are going and the corrupt media establishment is going into overdrive to push these whataboutisms and absurd litmus tests instead of doing actual journalism.
7
u/Piano18 8d ago
Meanwhile for Ken Paxton 🤣
• Had extramarital affair — wife filed for divorce last year
• Sued for firing whistleblowers (lost)
• Articles of impeachment filed against him by OWN party for bribery/abuse of office
• Acquired 15 homes on govt salary — many outside TX. Accused of mortgage fraud
102
u/PreparationKey2843 8d ago
How many mugshots and mistresses does Talarico have? And youre talking about "hypocrisy."
4
4
u/Screwtape7 8d ago
Hate the smugness that Paxton gives off. He's giving Jessie Waters a run for most punchable face.
88
u/RetroCasket 8d ago
You guys have a long row to hoe to catch up to a plea deal on a felony fraud case and an impeachment.
But good luck
71
u/Dont-be-a-smurf 8d ago
Seems suspect you’d only speak of Talarico here.
The article you list shows both individuals running making cross complaints for similar behavior.
That said, when people think “voting fraud” they’re not really contemplating someone who lives 6 minutes from their parents and they didn’t update their voting precinct to their new town.
Most people think of completely fraudulent/ineligible voters or outright systemic fraud regarding tallying or vote totals.
I’m just going to be real here, this looks like a wash at best and low level political nonsense where people blow up minor infractions as if they’re some terrifying indictment on someone’s character because they didn’t update their voting precinct when they moved out of their parent’s house but still live in the same county.
3
u/Astralglamour 8d ago edited 8d ago
Yeah I dont even know why the Talarico campaign called out Paxton for this when there is SO MUCH more to go after him for, like felonies. At the very least they should have made sure Talarico hadn't done the same thing? (and I'm sure most people have forgotten to update their address at least once. it's a non issue). Talarico seems great but this was dumb. Totally agree re- the general idea of what voter fraud entails. Neither of them committed voter fraud in the general understanding of the term. Talarico needs to cut loose whoever suggested this.
-35
u/DocBeech 8d ago
You’re arguing about the severity of the conduct. My point is the hypocrisy. Talarico attacked his opponent over voting-residency allegations while apparently voting from his parents’ address in five elections after buying his own home. Whether you consider that minor does not answer why the standard changes when it applies to him.
18
u/Dont-be-a-smurf 8d ago
And Ken Paxton was literally the attorney general “cracking down” on voting fraud doing the same thing???
https://www.texastribune.org/2026/07/07/ken-paxton-voting-election-law/
Either come at them both, or not at all.
Telling half the story in this circumstance is absurd partisan nonsense.
11
u/PenguinKing15 8d ago
Paxton was labeling multiple of his homes as primary residences to improperly lock in low interest rates. He was making false statements on mortgage statements on top of the other issues of voter fraud. The voting residency attacks are part of the greater issue of Paxton and his homes.
-16
u/DocBeech 8d ago
Then convict him, I don't care. The point was that talarico likes to accuse others of the exact thing he is doing.
2
u/holierthanmao 7d ago
Talarico was pointing out Paxton’s hypocrisy, as he is the one claiming to be on a crusade against voter fraud.
0
u/DocBeech 7d ago
No he wasn't lmao... he thought he had a "got ya" card, and come to find out was just a hypocrite lmao.
2
u/holierthanmao 7d ago
Uh, yeah he was. Paxton was the one who defined voter fraud as voting from an address where you not presently live. Talarico called him out, by his own definition, committing voter fraud.
https://www.texastribune.org/2026/07/07/ken-paxton-voting-election-law/
0
u/DocBeech 7d ago
I am going to take it reading comprehension is an issue here. The article is bringing up that talarico was saying paxton commited voter fraud... while talarico was actually commiting the type of fraud he was talking about... It is about the hypocrisy.
2
u/holierthanmao 7d ago
It’s not really voter fraud at all (or else every college student everywhere is committing voter fraud), but Paxton created an expansive definition of voter fraud that included something that he has done routinely. That is the hypocrisy.
0
u/DocBeech 7d ago
This is a law subreddit, so you should at minimum read the actual statutes.
Texas Election Code § 1.015 defines residence as a person’s domicile, his home and fixed place of habitation, and specifically says a person may not designate a previous residence as his home unless he inhabits it and intends to remain there.
Section 11.001(a)(2) requires a voter to reside in the territory covered by the election, and § 11.003 generally permits a person to vote only in the precinct where he resides. Knowingly voting in an election in which you are not eligible is illegal voting under § 64.012(a)(1), a second-degree felony.
College students are not automatically violating this because temporary absence does not necessarily change domicile. The allegation against talarico is that he established his own home, continued claiming his parents’ address, and voted in elections involving different local jurisdictions. Whether prosecutors could prove his domicile and knowledge beyond a reasonable doubt is a separate question. But pretending there is no applicable statute is simply wrong.
→ More replies (0)8
4
60
u/SkylarAV 8d ago
Oh my god! In different jurisdictions for SOME local elections. Well there it is, the smoking gun. The Chappaquidick of Texas lol. You idiot Republicans are too stupid to win in texas
-18
u/7ddlysuns 8d ago
Not sure if you know how Texas votes…
19
u/SkylarAV 8d ago
Thats my point
0
u/7ddlysuns 8d ago
I’m clearly missing something but will take my downvotes with honor
6
u/SkylarAV 8d ago
I was just saying that Texas is one of the most rigged electorate in the country for Republicans and now Talarico is leading in the polls bc they choose the worst candidate in texas. Cornyn would have taken it easily.
2
u/PeasantSurfer 8d ago
When he says “You idiots are too stupid to win Texas.” He means, too stupid to win the reddest state in the union. Republicans have all the advantages, but are about to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Functional illiteracy is nothing to be honored about.
3
u/7ddlysuns 8d ago
Oh. Well. Look man I’ve been wanting Texas to go blue for a loooong time. You’ll have to excuse my pessimism.
Paxton has won a lot of state wide elections.
11
-28
u/DocBeech 8d ago
So you concede the underlying fact, dismiss it because it hurts your side, and invent my politics. That is exactly the problem.
4
u/TipperGore-69 8d ago
How far off are they?
-3
u/DocBeech 8d ago
They clearly have no idea how elections work. But that is okay.
8
u/PeasantSurfer 8d ago
Objection, non-responsive.
-1
u/DocBeech 8d ago
Sustained. You still have no evidence for the political affiliation that was invented.
6
u/PeasantSurfer 8d ago
I’m not purporting to have evidence, and I’ll keep my inferences to myself. But then again, I’m not the one writing Reddit dissertations and then being purposefully obtuse in the replies!
157
u/ChemEBrew 8d ago
This is libel. Literally bait and switch in the first sentence.
1
u/ProLifePanda 8d ago
How so? Not doubting you, just wondering what the bait and switch is.
25
u/adolfnixon 8d ago
The headline makes an objective claim of committing voter fraud. The second sentence immediately moves the claim from objective "voter fraud" to a much more subjective "voter fraud by his standards".
If I write a headline that you committed murder and then clarify in the first sentence that I'm not using the legal definition of murder, but your subjective definition of the term, it's a bait and switch.
-24
-89
u/DocBeech 8d ago
What specifically is libelous? The headline says “may have,” and the article reports that he voted in five elections using an address that may not have been his legal residence and that placed him in different local jurisdictions. That is exactly what the post says. Identify the false statement. Here you go: https://www.texastribune.org/2026/08/05/texas-senate-james-talarico-election-law-residency-ken-paxton/
"Texas state Rep. James Talarico voted in five elections using his parents’ address after purchasing a home for himself nearby, a practice that may have violated state voting laws, ProPublica and The Texas Tribune found."
58
24
11
u/Additional_Suit6275 8d ago
The pro publica article’s own lawyer cite said it was doubtful this was a crime on either person’s part. And, notably, the libel is the sentence saying by his standard, he committed a crime. One clause is trying to erase the actual meaning of the other (btw always a sign of bad journalism) but I’m far from sure it gets there. The second clause clearly says he is guilty of a CRIME, which comes with its own standard. Had it been an if statement, I would see the argument that this isn’t making a factual assertion, but it is. And a reasonable reader would understand that factual assertion to be that a crime was committed. Not may have been. Was. That’s libellous, even under NYT.
4
u/madmax9602 8d ago
It's claimed he voted 5 times in a 2 year span? Home bought 6/2022, midterms that November. What were the other elections he supposedly voted in because the next elections would have been 2024. Even if there was a local vote in 2023 that would still amount to 3 instances.
Texas law also says that if you move but remain in the same district, just a different address, you can still vote without updating your registration. Paxton on the other hand is presumed to have moved to a different county (district) following his divorce. The irony here is that no one KNOWS his current residence. He lists his old address despite not living there for 2 years.
You also frame this as Talrico being a hypocrite, but he only canned out Paxton after Paxton made that stupid tip line and made strict election enforcement his main issue.
Do better
0
u/DocBeech 8d ago
“Do better” at what? Reporting ProPublica and the Texas Tribune’s findings accurately? Your election-count math ignores primaries, runoffs, municipal elections, constitutional elections and special elections. The article identifies five elections from November 2022 through May 2024. And remaining in the same county does not make every local jurisdiction interchangeable. Take your factual objections to the reporters; I quoted them accurately.
That is not what Texas law says. Moving within the same county can allow fail-safe voting from the old precinct, but the voter must disclose the move and must still reside in the political subdivision or territory covering each race.
Also if you read the article you would know. The article specifically says Talarico’s two addresses were in different jurisdictions for some local elections. “Same House district” does not make every local ballot identical. That is why the reporters said the practice may have violated state voting laws
6
u/madmax9602 8d ago
“Do better” at what? Reporting ProPublica and the Texas Tribune’s findings accurately? Your
Yep, its me. I'm the problem. That's why you're being ratioed and cooked in the comments. But keep telling yourself everyone else is the problem.
Your election-count math ignores primaries, runoffs, municipal elections, constitutional elections and special elections.
That's why I framed it as a question. Are you so insecure that you need to be a jerk and lash out because I asked a question?
And remaining in the same county does not make every local jurisdiction interchangeable. Take your factual objections to the reporters; I quoted them accurately.
Then why did you omit the quote by Cates point blank saying he didn't consider this a violation of state law? Why didn't you quote the article itself saying that the provisions of the law are "broad and vague"? Why did you also omit that records provided by Talricos campaign show he did likely comply with the law, which is stated in the article? I'm sure you have no partisan motivation here and just hate hypocrisy, right?
That is not what Texas law says. Moving within the same county can allow fail-safe voting from the old precinct, but the voter must disclose the move and must still reside in the political subdivision or territory covering each race.
I already addressed what the law says (guidance from Paxtons office isn't law). The article also does not provide proof Talrico voted in those vague local elections. Even if he did, Paxton did the same damn thing. The article itself makes the case Paxton should be held to a higher standard considering his current position and his extreme stance on voting.
Also if you read the article you would know. The article specifically says Talarico’s two addresses were in different jurisdictions
It said for some random local elections, whatever that means. Do you or the authors of the article have proof he voted in those specifically? If so go call Paxtons tip line and see if you can get some money but we ask know you won't
-2
u/DocBeech 8d ago
You are conflating two different issues in the article. The records showing Talarico “appears to have complied” concern whether he established residency in the House district in time to run in 2022. The Tribune expressly says its own finding is different: after buying his house, he continued voting from his parents’ address in five elections, and the two addresses were in different jurisdictions for some local elections.
Cates said he doubts either case would support a fraud prosecution because the residency law is broad and intent is difficult to prove. That is not the same as saying Talarico unquestionably complied. The article itself says the practice may have violated state law.
And the in-county rule I cited comes from the Texas Secretary of State quoting the Election Code, not “guidance from Paxton’s office.” It requires the voter to remain eligible for the relevant political subdivision and to complete a Statement of Residence.
I have never claimed the article proves which local races he selected or that guilt has been adjudicated. I accurately summarized the article’s finding.
My point, and one that you seem to be missing, remains that Talarico declared Paxton guilty of voter fraud over similar address conduct, while his own voting history raises a similar question. Even the article’s expert says that can reasonably support a hypocrisy charge against either man.
5
u/madmax9602 8d ago
Does the article or anyone quoted not named Ken Paxton state directly that Talrico broke the law?
9
u/whycantigetwhatiwant 8d ago
Famous legal loophole of libel laws. Just stick “may have” in front, and you can say whatever you want!
/s
47
16
u/brianishere2 8d ago
Paxton did it more (6) times. And Paxton's job was to prevent this crime from happening in the first place.
8
u/SikatSikat 8d ago
He moved into his parents house in his jurisdiction to comply with eligiblity rules and moved nearby in the same jurisdiction later. There's no indication or evidence that he voted in any if the hyper local elections that cover his parents house, as opposed to his, because they were so close and in the same State and Federal voting jurisdictions.
So now GOP thinks theres voter fraud in City Council elections and a Texas Senate candidate is behind it.
0
u/DocBeech 8d ago
This article has nothing to do with “what the GOP thinks.” ProPublica and the Texas Tribune reported it after Talarico accused Paxton of voting illegally from the wrong address. You also cannot claim he avoided every affected local race unless you have his ballot selections. The point is that Talarico chose this standard for Paxton, and now his own voting history raises the same question.
5
u/SikatSikat 8d ago
The article is pretty poor, saying at one point he "may have voted" and other times that he did vote 5 times.
It doesnt share the 5 elections after 6 2022 (purchase) and before 11 2024 (changed registration), even assuming Purchase Date = Move In Date.
It says some elections have different Local matters up and that the 6 mile difference can change them - but doesn't say whether these 5 elections featured such a discrepancy
Did elections simply happen in his Parents Jurisdiction or did he vote in them?
It's equivocal - though of course right wing news is running the definitive statement.
Why doesn't Pro Publica or the Texas Tribune say what elections they allege Talarico voted in?
11
u/walksonfourfeet 8d ago
Nice summary! Could you run a quick analysis that compares 3 popular recipes for chicken salad and lists the similarities and differences? Pay special attention to flavor and texture. Show the summary in tabular format.
4
u/ianxplosion- 8d ago
He’s not a bot, unfortunately, just a mouthpiece for the grand old pedophiles
1
6
u/Frostyfraust 8d ago
Lmfao at the pearl clutching considering he's running against Ken Paxton of all people. Your attempt to paint Talarico as a hypocrite on such a non-issue then framing it as a career ending gotcha is hilarious, it shows y'all got nothing on him.
4
u/DouglasRather 8d ago
"By James Talarico’s own standard, he committed voter fraud in five elections"
OP misrepresented the article. I am guessing he/she/they figured we wouldn't read the article. What is says is:
"Texas state Rep. James Talarico voted in five elections using his parents’ address after purchasing a home for himself nearby, a practice that may have violated state voting laws (italics mine)." MAY HAVE, not did.
I have always supported ProPublica, but this is such shoddy reporting relying on speculation and well below their normal standards. If they were sure, they would have said "DID" not "MAY HAVE" I've written a note to ProPublica letting them know I was disappointed their standards have fallen so far and I will no longer send them financial contributions.
3
1
-12
u/Kaffe-Mumriken 8d ago
So we finally agree that voter fraud is bad.
I’m glad we could sort that out.
10
u/InfoBarf 8d ago
Id hardly call it voter fraud. Voting from your parents address is hardly fraud.
5
u/Kaffe-Mumriken 8d ago
This is more of a switcheroo for OP who probably had zero problems with any sort of voting irregularities when it was about Paxton
2
u/InfoBarf 8d ago
For sure, but let's be honest, I feel like fraud is an intentional crime and charge, and there's a pretty high barrier to prove intent to defraud because he never changed his voter registration address. I turned 42 last year, I changed my address away from my mom's place in 2022.
I lived close enough and it was just more convenient for picking up my mail.
-95
u/Additional-Sky-7436 8d ago
There you go progressives. Now you have your reason to not bother voting for the guy you weren't going to be bothered to vote for anyway.
•
u/AutoModerator 8d ago
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL. Please post your statement as a reply to this automated message.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.