Partisanship reached a boiling point in Texas over the weekend as Democratic lawmakers took a dramatic step to obstruct a GOP-backed bill that would impose severe limits on voting access.
In the final hours of the legislative session, Democrats staged a dramatic walkout, leaving the state House without a quorum and therefore unable to hold a final vote on the measure. But in doing so, Democrats have only exacerbated the polarization and dysfunction entrenched in the American political system at all levels.
Following last year's tumultuous pandemic-era election, Republican lawmakers have been pushing for stricter voting rules aimed at bolstering election security, even though there was no evidence of widespread voter fraud. Meanwhile, their Democrat counterparts are trying to expand access to the ballot box. The divergent narratives driven by the two parties have left little room for compromise, furthering political divisions.
While Texas' voting overhaul bill has been stalled by Democrats for now, the GOP has vowed to resurrect it during the special legislative session. Republican Gov. Greg Abbott can call for a special session as soon as this week, but he may wait until later in the summer so legislators can also tackle redistricting.
Abbott, who strongly supported the blocked voting legislation, also threatened to defund the Legislature following the Democrats' walkout. "No pay for those who abandon their responsibilities," he tweeted Monday afternoon.
Predictably, Republican leaders condemned the Democrats while reformers celebrated the walkout.
"This is a victory for all Texas voters!" Grace Chimene, president of the League of Women Voters of Texas, said in a statement. "Texans want elections to be free, fair, and accessible. They want a transparent process they can trust, where Americans have equal freedom to vote, no matter what they look like or where they live, whether in a small Texas town or one of Texas' major metropolitan areas. SB 7 is not what Texas voters want."
Much of the restrictions in the legislation were hashed out at the last minute behind closed doors since the Senate and House passed different versions that needed to be reconciled. Some of the provisions included bans on drive-through and 24-hour voting, new restrictions on vote-by-mail eligibility, new ID requirements for mail voting, limited early voting hours on Sundays, and increased authority for partisan poll watchers.
On Saturday, President Biden denounced the Texas bill, saying it's an attack on the sacred right to vote, much like the legislation passed earlier this year in Georgia and Florida.
"It's part of an assault on democracy that we've seen far too often this year — and often disproportionately targeting Black and Brown Americans," Biden said in a statement.
During the special session, lawmakers will have to start from scratch with the voting legislation, as well as any other bills that did not make it to Abbott's desk. There is concern that the next election overhaul measure could be even more restrictive than the one blocked by Democrats.
Texas is no stranger to blocked legislation. In 2013, then-state Sen. Wendy Davis, a Democrat, famously held a 13-hour filibuster to block a restrictive abortion measure. And in 2003, Democratic lawmakers fled to Oklahoma, beyond the jurisdiction of Texas state police, to block a vote on a Republican-drawn redistricting plan.
Minority party lawmakers have used the lack of a quorum as a political tactic to thwart legislation in other states as well. Earlier this year and in the two previous legislative sessions, Oregon has seen walkouts from Republicans wishing to block bills related to Covid-19 and the environment. A decade ago, Indiana and Wisconsin also saw walkouts from Democratic lawmakers.
A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.