We recommend in race for Texas Criminal Court of Appeals, Presiding Judge

Two strong candidates are vying to serve as presiding judge of the state’s highest criminal court.
Republican David Schenck, a longtime jurist who served on the 5th District Court of Appeals from 2015-22, has impressed us for many years for his careful reading of the law and his service as a steward of judicial ethics.
But voters have a hard choice in this race because a well-qualified Democrat in longtime Travis County prosecutor Holly Taylor is also standing for this bench.
Both have the legal background and serious approach to the law to do the job. We recommend Schenck based on his years of experience as an appellate judge, something Taylor lacks.
Get smart opinions on the topics North Texans care about.
Or with:
By signing up you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Taylor, 57, does have a great deal of experience in appellate law. She served for four years as Rules Attorney for the Court of Criminal Appeals in addition to her many years in leadership as a supervising prosecutor. She currently is director of the Public Integrity and Complex Crimes Division of the Travis County District Attorney’s office.
Compare the candidates’ answers to our questions in our Voter Guide.
We believe that both Schenck, 57, and Taylor would apply the law fairly. Schenck, however, has authored hundreds, if not thousands, of appellate opinions and has done so while developing a reputation as a knowledgeable and fair jurist.
We were given pause that Schenck was among three candidates whom Attorney General Ken Paxton endorsed after the Court of Criminal Appeals rightly rejected Paxton’s unlawful attempt to expand his prosecutorial powers. We saw this as an attempt on Paxton’s part to unduly influence the court. It was the sort of move that risks undermining confidence in the judiciary.
However, we have to balance Schenck’s acceptance of Paxton’s endorsement against two important facts. First, he ran against the incumbent presiding judge, Sharon Keller, in the Republican primary. Keller has a history of poor judicial and ethical actions, and it was easy for us to choose Schenck as the better candidate in that race.
Also, Schenck has a long history of standing up for the highest judicial conduct, including an ongoing push for campaign finance reform. He served as chairman of the Texas State Commission on Judicial Conduct and was an admirable voice for holding unethical judges to account. His reputation is such that we give him the benefit of the doubt when he offers assurances that he will act independently of any attempt at undue influence.
This court is the final state court of review for death penalty cases. The stakes in such a race couldn’t be higher.
Both Schenck and Taylor convinced us that they understand the law and are prepared to apply it as it is written while considering all relevant facts in the record.
We believe that, in a close call, Schenck is the best choice.
We welcome your thoughts in a letter to the editor. See the guidelines and submit your letter here. If you have problems with the form, you can submit via email at [email protected]