← Election Series · Down-ballot coverage · Texas

Endorses Hawkins

The race

Place 7 on the Texas Supreme Court, elected statewide November 3, 2026. Verified roster: Kyle D. Hawkins (R), the appointed incumbent, vs. Kristen Hawkins (D). The shared surname is a coincidence — the candidates are not related, a point the voter guides themselves flag.

Kyle D. Hawkins — Incumbent. Abbott appointed Hawkins in October 2025 to replace Justice Jeff Boyd, who retired September 1. Hawkins was Texas Solicitor General from 2018 to 2021 (assistant SG 2017–2018), clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito and Judge Edith Jones, argued five cases in the U.S. Supreme Court and nine in the Texas Supreme Court, and was a partner at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. His campaign reported $216,374 on hand. His stated approach: "applying the law as written," with "humility, diligence." One credit deserves its own line: as Solicitor General he did not sign Attorney General Paxton's 2020 lawsuit asking the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the 2020 election results, and he resigned from the AG's office shortly afterward — a documented act of professional independence, reported contemporaneously. Dirt check: his judicial tenure is months, not years — the shortest on this ballot — and he did not answer the Vote411 questionnaire in this cycle.

Kristen Hawkins — Challenger. A Houston state district judge since 2017 (11th District Court), board certified in judicial administration, civil-trial law, and personal-injury law, named Tex-ABOTA Judge of the Year in 2021, with more than 200 jury and bench trials presided; she led the court's COVID-19 response and was assigned to multidistrict litigation including the Astroworld cases. She reported $301,668 on hand — more than her opponent — and argues the high court benefits from trial judges who see how its rulings play out. She answered Vote411 in full, committing to fact-and-law decisions regardless of contributions. Dirt check: no discipline found; no appellate opinion record exists by definition (she is a trial judge), and no break record was documented.

Pros and cons

Kyle Hawkins: Pros: Solicitor General pedigree; Alito clerkship; a stated law-as-written philosophy; the documented 2020 non-signature, which is independence with a paper trail. Cons: Barely a year on the bench by Election Day; no Vote411 answers; appointed path. Kristen Hawkins: Pros: Nine years running a trial court; 200+ trials; Judge of the Year; the better-funded campaign; a serious "rulings have consequences" argument. Cons: Trial-court skill is not appellate restraint; no stated originalist philosophy; no break record.

OUR CALL

Our call: endorse Kyle D. Hawkins. This is the closest of the four Supreme Court races on raw experience, and we price it honestly: Kristen Hawkins has the longer judicial résumé. The call rests on philosophy and the appellate record that exists — a Solicitor General who argued the state's cases in both high courts, states a law-as-written philosophy, and once declined to sign his own boss's marquee lawsuit. That is the restraint file. Her trial-court excellence is a credit; it is not a substitute for it.

Vote Kyle Hawkins.

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