Meet Randy Sarosdy

What is your background and campaign platform?

I practiced law for 30 years and then spent 15 years teaching judges throughout Texas. I believe we must have judges who are willing to protect our fundamental rights under the Texas and U.S. Constitutions and ensure that everyone has full and fair access to justice. I believe in the rule of law, that the law applies equally to all without regard to race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation or national origin and that no one is above the law regardless of their status or prior office.

Which Texas Supreme Court case do you believe to be the most important? Why?

The most important recent case by the Texas Supreme Court is the Katie Cox case (No. 23-0994). Ms. Cox's fetus had been diagnosed with trisomy 18 (a fatal condition) and Ms. Cox alleged that her own life and fertility were threatened if she did not end her pregnancy. The trial court agreed and granted a temporary restraining order against the State of Texas that would have allowed Ms. Cox to have an immediate abortion. The Texas Supreme Court reversed and held Ms. Cox had not established that her symptons were life-threatening. Ms. Cox had to leave Texas to obtain needed medical care. Most Texans in this terrible predicament do not have such resources.

What inspired you to pursue a path of studying law?

I was inspired to study law because I recognized that the rule of law is a foundation of our democratic system of government. If fairly and impartially applied, it is a means of obtaining redress for injury and injustice and for protecting our cherished fundamental freedoms. It has been my great privilege to be a very small part of one of the pillars of our democracy.

Describe an interesting case on which you worked.

I represented on appeal an individual who had been charged with burglary and larceny. At his trial one of his defense witnesses was arrested and charged with participating in the same offense. As a result of his mid-trial arrest, the witness was not able to testify for the defendant who was then convicted. The ground for the appeal was that the mid-trial arrest of the defense witness violated the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right of confrontation and compulsory process. (I represented the defendant pro bono, meaning without charging a fee.)

How do you handle making difficult decisions, especially ones with which you do not agree?

I pay attention and listen carefully and respectfully to all sides of an issue and hear from all persons who wish to be heard. I work hard to understand all the facts and base my decision and conclusions on the reality shown by the evidence. The results may not always be what we would like but the genius of our democracy is that other legitimate means may be available to achieve a different result in the future. But always while adhering to the rule of law and our democratic institutions.