Texas Gov. Greg Abbott had a message Sunday for the dozens of Democratic legislators who fled the state to derail a mega-partisan gerrymander: “This truancy ends now.”

But Abbott’s options to compel those Democrats — whose departure to Illinois and other states is preventing the state Legislature from conducting any business — to return and vote are more constrained and legally uncertain than he let on. And they may take significant time to resolve in court.

Abbott and other Texas Republicans face a hard deadline as they are preparing to adopt maps that could net the GOP five seats in the U.S. House, potentially cementing the party’s majority in Congress. Maps need to be completed before the end of the year so that election officials can prepare for the state’s March 3 primaries. The move has also prompted retaliation threats by Democratic governors in other states and roiled expectations for the 2026 elections, when Democrats hope to take the House and act as a check on President Donald Trump.

Here’s a look at the central questions as Abbott’s standoff with Texas House Democrats deepens into a monumental political and legal brawl.

Why did Texas Democrats leave the state?

Texas’ constitution requires two-thirds of the state’s 150 House members to be present to conduct business. That gives the 62-member House Democratic minority a break-glass-in-case-of-emergency option to grind the Capitol’s business to a halt even if they would be outnumbered on an up-or-down vote.

By absconding from Austin — and the state altogether — Democrats ensured that the Legislature lacked a quorum to convene for a special session called by Abbott to address redistricting. There is some recent history on this: Democrats mounted a similar effort to “break quorum” in 2021 in protest of election-related legislation. The effort ended after Democrats gradually trickled back into the state, amid a similar flurry of arrest threats and lawsuits. 

Importantly, breaking quorum is not a crime. However, if the absentee Democratic lawmakers remained in Texas, Abbott could order state troopers to haul them to the Capitol. That’s why they fled for the friendlier confines of Illinois and other blue states, where Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker and other allies have vowed to shelter them from Texas’ demands to bring them back.

What are Abbott’s legal options?

Federal laws allow states to demand the return, or “extradition,” of criminal fugitives from other states. But because breaking quorum is not illegal, Abbott can’t seek help from the courts to compel the Democrats’ return.

Instead, Abbott threatened to take another action against the absentee lawmakers: Ask Texas courts to remove them from office altogether. State law permits a Texas district court to determine whether a public official has “abandoned” his or her office, declaring it vacant — enabling the governor to set new elections to fill the empty seats.

“Come and take it,” dared state Rep. Gene Wu, the Texas House Democratic Caucus leader, in an appearance Monday morning on BLN. Wu declared Abbott’s threat to be “all bluster.”

The governor’s threat is rooted in a nonbinding legal opinion issued in 2021 by Attorney General Ken Paxton, amid the last attempt by Democrats to break quorum. Paxton, notably, took no position on whether breaking quorum is constitutional.

The republican AG also declined to say whether fleeing Democrats could or should be removed from office. Rather, he called it a “fact question for a court” that he said was beyond the scope of his office to decide. He noted instead that he could file what are known as “quo warranto actions” in court, asking a judge to determine whether the missing lawmakers had officially vacated their seats.

How would a judge make that call? Paxton said he wasn’t certain.

“We find no constitutional provision or statute establishing an exhaustive list for why a vacancy occurs or the grounds under which an officer may be judicially removed from office,” he wrote.

How long could it take Abbott to force the Legislature back into session?

This is the most uncertain aspect of Abbott’s gambit. Paxton’s office would need to file “quo warranto” actions in various judicial districts for more than 50 fleeing lawmakers. Judges may take up these cases on different timelines and reach different conclusions, requiring appeals that could wind their way to the Texas Supreme Court.

Paxton acknowledged in an interview with conservative podcaster Benny Johnson that the timeline would be problematic.

“The challenge is that [it] wouldn’t necessarily be an immediate answer, right?” he said. “We’d have to go through the court process, and we’d have to file … in districts that are not friendly to Republicans,” Paxton said. “So it’s a challenge because every, every district would be different. We’d have to go sue in every legislator’s home district to try to execute on that idea.”

And even if Abbott and Paxton win a clean sweep in removing the Democrats from office, it would then require a time-intensive process of calling special elections to fill the vacancies — and guaranteeing that the winners of those elections also remain in the state as well.

That timing matters when the GOP-led redistricting plan is on a fixed timeline: A new map must be adopted by early December in order to be in place for the 2026 midterm cycle. That would require Democrats to remain out of state for about four months while they accumulate $500-per-day civil fines. The current special Legislative session is slated to end on Aug. 19, but Abbott could call another one.

Could the Democrats be charged with crimes?

Abbott’s letter, though sharply critical, stopped short of actually accusing Democrats of breaking the law. Rather, he suggested that if outsiders are helping them fundraise to cover their fines, they might run afoul of bribery laws.

“It would be bribery if any lawmaker took money to perform or to refuse to perform an act in the legislature,” Abbott said in a Fox News interview Monday. “And the reports are these legislators have both sought money and offered money to skip the vote, to leave the legislature, to take a legislative act.”

If Texas prosecutors in fact level any such charges, then Abbott’s authority to return them grows stronger. He could then ask courts in Texas and Illinois to seek the return of the missing lawmakers.

“I will use my full extradition authority to demand the return to Texas of any potential out-of-state felons,” he said in his Sunday statement.

Liz Crampton contributed reporting.

Radio host Charlamagne tha God fired back at President Donald Trump, accusing the president of pushing authoritarian tactics after Trump called the radio host a “dope” in a recent social media post.

On Monday’s episode of his radio show “The Breakfast Club,” Charlamagne said Trump also failed to deliver on key campaign promises and used his show to dissect the president’s Truth Social post point by point.

“Listen, my fellow Americans, we are in a strange time right now, a time we have never seen because authoritarian strategy is being used against anyone who speaks out against this administration,” Charlamagne, whose given name is Lenard McKelvey, said.

Charlamagne drew the ire of Trump after he joined Fox News’ “My View with Lara Trump,” the president’s daughter-in-law. Charlamagne said under the new administration “the least of us are still being impacted the worst.” He also said the ongoing controversy around the release of information regarding the death of disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein is driving a wedge between the GOP and its supporters.

Soon after, the president responded by calling Charlamagne a “racist sleazebag,” a criticism Charlamagne defended against on Monday.

“He called me a racist. I didn’t mention race, not one time on Lara Trump. I didn’t bring up the fact that President Trump issued an executive order directing oversight of institutions like the Smithsonian to remove or suppress narratives about systemic racism and Black history,” Charlamagne said, referring to an executive order earlier this year demanding the Smithsonian remove exhibits that divided Americans “based on race.”

Charlamagne added that he was “just talking to your base” and letting voters know Trump hasn’t kept the promises he made on the campaign trail.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Charlamagne also accused Trump of making the economy “worse” before criticizing the president’s decision to fire the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics Commissioner, Erika McEntarfer, after the latest monthly jobs report came in well under expectations.

“It’s actually hilarious to see you upset about the high unemployment rates when you let Elon Musk take a chainsaw to the federal government and fire a bunch of government workers earlier this year. You did that, President Trump, and now you’re doing exactly what the Biden administration did, trying to convince America the economy is all good when it’s not,” he said.

Still, Charlamagne said that he is actually “rooting” for Trump.

“President Trump, don’t worry about Lenard, okay, don’t worry about Charlamagne tha God. I know something I said hit a nerve and rattled you a little bit, but I don’t want you rattled,” Charlamagne said. “I want you to end wars, okay? I want you to keep the border secure. I want you to have the economy booming, okay? I want all these things to be true. I am an American. I don’t care who’s in the White House. I want America to succeed. But I need you focused, and right now you’re not focused.”

New York Rep. Ritchie Torres — one of the Democratic Party’s most ardent Zionists — has begun questioning Israel as recent images of starving Palestinian children shock leaders across the world.

Torres’ shift is slight and nuanced. Yet coming from such a vocal defender of Israel, it signifies how moderate Democrats are backing away from the unqualified support for the Jewish state that’s underscored the party for decades. And it comes as countries around the globe are reacting in horror at the famine gripping the region and reports of thousands of children dying of starvation as the Israeli military continues its offensive following Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack.

“All parties, including the U.S. and Israel, have a moral obligation to do everything in our power to ease the hardship and hunger that’s taken hold in the Gaza Strip,” Torres said in an interview last week.

He insisted his longheld defense of Israel still stands. “I feel it’s possible to be an unapologetic Zionist while at the same time recognizing there’s a crisis in Gaza and recognizing the war has poorly defined strategic objectives,” he said.

Torres is not alone in his remarks.

Throughout the country, moderate Democrats, who have long resisted pressure to reject Zionism on their left flank, are increasingly speaking out against Israel’s actions in Gaza as they react to anger among constituents ahead of the midterms next year. It’s a shift in attitude percolating from the halls of Congress to governor’s mansions. How Democrats speak about Israel is bound to be a litmus test in battleground Democratic primaries next year as the party fights to retake control of the House and pick up several Senate seats.

In recent days, a majority of Democratic senators voted for a resolution to bar the sale of assault rifles to Israeli police, a marked change in the party since the start of the military conflict. Their unprecedented rebuke comes as polling shows slipping support for Israel among Democratic voters, signaling the prolonged war has potentially caused permanent damage to the country’s relationship with the Democratic Party. And on Sunday, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) said “what’s happening now isn’t working.”

It’s a dynamic that’s also emerging on the right, as the most isolationist voices in MAGA are more forcefully condemning Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the escalating humanitarian crisis in the region.

“The facts on the ground are that militarily, they have significant tactical advantages and are sufficient enough to be able to effectively deliver food. So the question arises, why can’t you get food in there and health care services and basically follow humanitarian laws,” said Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed, who joined 11 new Democrats in voting for the resolution from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) after opposing two versions only supported by a handful of progressives.

Another resolution to block the sale of heavy-grade munitions earned the support of 24 Democrats, though it failed. All Republicans opposed both resolutions brought to the floor Wednesday – but Sanders hinted GOP support may come as public opinion moves further against Netanyahu

“You’re going to see fairly soon, a number of Republicans beginning to understand that their constituents don’t want taxpayer dollars to go to an Israeli government starving children,” Sanders said.

In the interview, Torres said “all parties, including the U.S. and Israel, have a moral obligation to do everything in our power to ease the hardship and hunger that’s taken hold in the Gaza Strip.”

Torres has also tried to keep attention on the Israeli hostages held by Hamas. “The world’s silence about the deliberate starvation of Israeli hostages—at the hands of Hamas and Islamic Jihad — is as deafening as its hypocrisy,” he posted on X on Saturday. “Expect the images of emaciated Israeli bodies, starved in captivity, to appear nowhere in the pages of most major American newspapers.”

Pro-Israel donors and operatives defended Torres, with three people expressing appreciation for his continued support for Israel, while one person — who was not authorized to speak on the record — voiced concern with the frequency of his messages on social media.

“It’s precisely because Congressman Torres has been so proactive about calling out antisemitism that masquerades as antizionism that when he has constructive advice about Israel it’s listened to in a way that a statement from the member of congress who reps an adjacent district isn’t,” Stu Loeser — a New York-based consultant who represents Mike Bloomberg and a host of pro-Israel donors — said in reference to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. 

On the GOP side, U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene became the first Republican in Congress to describe the situation in Gaza, where more than 60,000 Palestinians have died in the conflict, a “genocide.” Prominent MAGA media figure Tucker Carlson hosted retired Green Beret Lt. Col. Tony Aguilar, who said he witnessed war crimes while working at Gaza food sites, on his show last week.

And even President Donald Trump, who has closely aligned himself with Netanyahu, implied that Israel bore primary responsibility for the situation in Gaza. A few days later, he reversed course, calling for Hamas to surrender and release hostages – deeming it “the fastest way” to end the humanitarian crisis.

“Everybody, left, right and center should react viscerally against starvation imposed by another government,” said Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz, a Democrat. “Whatever one’s views about this war, this is beyond the pale and unacceptable, and it does nothing to make Israel safe, or Israelis safe, or Jews safe.

Hardline Israel supporter Sen. John Fetterman said Thursday he viewed the resolutions – which he opposed – as his fellow Democrats blaming Israel for the circumstances, while he blamed on Hamas and Iran. “And that explains my vote, and my ongoing support. And that’s not going to change,” he said. The Pennsylvania Democrat said he’s seen the photos of starving children circulating online, but that, “no one ever declared that it was an actual famine, to be clear.”

Some former Biden administration officials argue Netanyahu’s actions, rather than the political winds, are driving this change. They blame Netanyahu for hurting Israel’s credibility with Democrats in the United States given his aggressive military action. Former President Joe Biden, a self-described Zionist, repeatedly called for a ceasefire between Israel and Palestine, but didn’t heed calls from the left for an arms embargo.

“Yes, the political incentives for Democrats are shifting, but even more powerful for many Democrats is the recognition that a blank check approach to Israel, especially with this Israeli government, is fundamentally in contravention to our interests and values,” said Ned Price, who served as State Department spokesperson and deputy to the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations during the Biden administration. “Bibi’s prosecution of this war has, I think, made this shift in many ways irreversible.”

A former Biden administration official, granted anonymity to speak freely about the political stakes, said a majority of Democratic senators voting to block weapons sales to Israel was unimaginable “even a few months ago” and speaks to “how badly Netanyahu has played this.” But the official cautioned this crisis is not as politically charged as was the Iraq War for many Democratic voters.

A Gallup poll released this week found approval of Israel’s military actions in Gaza had dropped to 8 percent among Democrats, the lowest rating to date. In contrast, 71 percent of Republicans said they approve of Israel’s military force in Gaza, up from 66 percent in September.

Changing public opinion on Gaza is most striking in New York, where Democratic primary voters nominated Zohran Mamdani for mayor despite millions of dollars spent attacking him for his anti-Israel posture in a heavily Jewish city. A vast majority believe Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.

Torres noted that “if there is an erosion of support for Israel in the United States, that’s not something the Israeli government should take lightly.”

Chris Coffey, a New York-based consultant and longtime Torres ally said the deepening split between the left and moderate factions of the Democratic party can be attributed to images of starving children, and criticism of Israel’s military action “was a minority view now feels like the majority view in the Democratic party.”

“When (people like) Richie Torres, who is arguably the most pro-Israel Democrat in the country and certainly in New York, are asking tough questions then it’s going to cause there to be some reflection and some ripples,” he said. “It’s going to force people to ask tough questions.”

Eric Bazail-Eimil and Joe Gould contributed reporting.