Eva Guzman is the political appointee of the pay-for-play Perry administration, and the Republican Party has been breaking its own rules to keep this hand-picked toady in place. Perry is behind this unprincipled political rule-breaking as part of his typical game plan of putting his own selfish interests ahead of what's best for Texas.
In typical corrupt Perry style, Perry tried to use the political appointment which Perry gave to Guzman as a bribe to try and get the Velas to switch loyalty to Perry. This practice is wrong and it must stop. The fact that Perry gave the political loyalty award to Guzman confirms that Guzman can be bought for a price that the Velas refused. In contrast to Eva Guzman's insider political games, Rose Vela promises transparency to help stop the problem where the Texas Supreme Court is dragging out cases longer than necessary, and Eva Guzman will never match that pledge because she's part of the insider political problem at the court.
More importantly, Eva Guzman is driven by a judicial activist agenda. In the case of Rowan Companies, Inc. v. Wilmington Trust Co., the conservative Republican trial judge Levi James Benton, the jury, and the conservative appellate judge Kem Frost all reviewed the facts of the case and concluded that the Wilmington Trust Company was entitled to its contractual rights. Eva Guzman changed the result in that case by rejecting Republican Judge Frost's conservative analysis, by overruling Republican Judge Benton, and by disregarding the jury.
In the case of All Star Enterprise, Inc. v. Buchanan, Eva Guzman rejected the analysis of conservative trial judge Patricia Hancock who had ruled that a foreign company had to accept responsibility in Texas courts for doing harm to Texans in Texas.
In the case of Green v. Alford, Eva Guzman once again rejected the conservative ruling of Republican trial judge Ken Wise and ingored the conservative analysis of her Republican colleague Justice Harvey Hudson.
As one mmore example of Eva Guzman's judicial activism, in the case of Ahmed v. Ahmed, conservative Republican judge Leslie Brock Yates correctly rejected the false argument that an Islamic marriage qualifies as an enforceable prenuptial agreement, but gullible Guzman would have fallen for this argument if her dissenting opinion was the majority rule.
Eva Guzman is a political appointee with an activist agenda. We don't need Guzman on the Texas Supreme Court. Vote for Rose Vela on March 2!