Opinion ID: 895342
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The voters lack standing to pursue their Election Code claims.

Text: In addition to their equal protection recount claim, the voters allege that the Secretary's certification of the eSlate deprives them of their statutory right to a recount, which the Election Code defines as the process conducted under this title for verifying the vote count in an election. TEX. ELEC.CODE § 211.002. Additionally, although their live pleading is silent on the point, the voters assert on appeal that the Secretary's certification of the eSlate violates the requirement that voting systems be capable of providing records from which the system's operation may be audited, and, therefore, the Secretary acted outside her authority in certifying the system. TEX. ELEC.CODE §§ 122.001, .032(a). Finally, although the voters did not plead it, the court of appeals noted that the voters' evidence supported a claim that the eSlate does not comply with statutory requirements that the system operate safely and accurately and that it be safe from fraudulent or unauthorized manipulation. TEX. ELEC.CODE § 122.001(a)(3), (4); 287 S.W.3d at 253 n. 10. The voters argue that Election Code section 273.081, which authorizes injunctive relief for a person who is being harmed or is in danger of being harmed by a violation or threatened violation of this code, gives them standing to pursue these claims. TEX. ELEC.CODE § 273.081. That provision, however, does not create standingit merely authorizes injunctive relief. As we have noted, statutes like this, which permit `persons aggrieved,' `persons adversely affected,' [or] `any party in interest,' to sue, still require that the plaintiff show how he has been injured or damaged other than as a member of the general public. Scott v. Bd. of Adjustment, 405 S.W.2d 55, 56 (Tex.1966). [27] This is because [s]uch suits are essentially private in character and are for the protection of private rights. Id. at 56. Here, the voters have made no showing that the Secretary's certification harmed them other than as members of the general public. Accordingly, for much the same reason their article VI claims are barred, the voters lack standing to pursue their Election Code complaints. Those allegations involve only generalized grievances about the lawfulness of government acts. See, e.g., Favorito, 684 S.E.2d at 263 (holding that voters' arguments regarding accuracy of recounts on DREs were merely hypothetical and cannot serve as a basis for declaratory relief). A desire to have the government act in conformance to the law is not enough, [28] and the voters assert no concrete, particularized harm to justify their claims here. [29] See Brown, 53 S.W.3d at 302.