← Election Series · Down-ballot coverage · Texas

Endorses Messinger

The race

Place 9 on the Court of Criminal Appeals is an open seat — Judge David Newell is not seeking re-election. Elected statewide November 3, 2026. Verified roster: John Messinger (R) vs. Holly Taylor (D). Law.com frames the contest as contrasting priorities on wrongful convictions, judicial independence, and timely rulings — an accurate frame, and we use it.

John Messinger — Challenger. An appellate prosecutor with the Office of the State Prosecuting Attorney since 2010 — the office that represents the State before this court — with earlier service in a county district attorney's office and a prior run for a state appellate seat. He has argued many cases before the Court of Criminal Appeals itself. His campaign's critique is institutional: the court is inconsistent in its rulings and slow in its review process, and his pledge is strict adherence to the law. Credits: sixteen years doing exactly this court's work from the state's table. Dirt check: no discipline found; the honest con is that he has never been a judge or a defense lawyer — his lens is the prosecution's, full stop.

Holly Taylor — Challenger. A criminal defense lawyer who spent more than 17 years as a Travis County prosecutor, including work with the Conviction Integrity Unit that reviews possible wrongful convictions; she later directed the DA's Public Integrity and Complex Crimes Division per the Democratic slate announcement, served as a staff and rules attorney at this court, and is board certified in criminal appellate law. The AWA endorsed Taylor. Credits: the most two-sided file in any CCA race this cycle — prosecution, conviction-integrity review, defense, and the court's own staff work. Dirt check: no discipline found; her conviction-integrity emphasis is the priority Law.com says divides the race — voters who weight finality and consistency first will read it as a con, and we record that pricing openly rather than hide it.

Pros and cons

Messinger: Pros: Sixteen years arguing before this court; a consistency-and-timeliness critique aimed at the institution itself; strict-adherence pledge. Cons: Prosecution-only career; never a judge; no defense-side experience. Taylor: Pros: Prosecutor + CIU + defense + court staff attorney + board certification — complete coverage of the criminal appellate ecosystem; AWA endorsement. Cons: Her flagship priority (wrongful-conviction review) signals a defense-leaning philosophy for a court whose docket is finality-heavy; no bench service.

OUR CALL

Our call: endorse John Messinger. Taylor has the broader résumé — we built it above and we mean it. The call turns on philosophy and institutional diagnosis: Messinger's stated program is strict adherence to the enacted law and a court that rules consistently and on time, which is the restraint-and-due-process pairing our doctrine backs, while Taylor's signature priority points the seat toward reopening final judgments. In an open seat with two unproven judges, the aligned philosophy with sixteen years before this bench carries it.

Vote Messinger.

For the complete Election 2026 breakdown — every race, claim by claim — see the full coverage on our website.

Vote early. Research your candidates. Choose the best moderates, whatever their party — no extremism from either side. And encourage your friends and family to do the same.

Sources

Election result — November 4, 2026

Result pending. No verified call (Associated Press or official) as of November 4, 2026. This page will be updated when the race is called or certified. The original article above is unchanged.

AI-assisted article — but the sources are human, and the facts are very real.

← Full down-ballot enumeration