Senator John Cornyn broke publicly Friday with Texas GOP leadership over a push to close the state’s primary elections, cautioning that the move could undermine Republican dominance rather than protect it in Texas.
Cornyn, who lost his May Republican primary runoff to Attorney General Ken Paxton, promoted an op-ed in the Dallas Morning News arguing that closed primaries would reduce voter turnout and damage the party’s long-term electoral position. In a pointed social media post, he wrote: “Democrats haven’t turned Texas blue; Republican’s [sic] might.”
Why It Matters
Texas operates as one of 17 states with open primaries, a system that allows eligible voters to participate in either party’s primary without registering under a party label. A shift to closed primaries would require formal party registration and restrict Republican primary participation to registered Republicans only.
The outcome of this debate could reshape how competitive Texas elections become — both in primaries and in general elections — at a time when Republicans are planning their first-ever midterm convention in Dallas this September and Democrats are actively working to rebuild their state presence.
What Happened
Governor Greg Abbott backed closed primaries publicly for the first time at the state GOP convention earlier this month, joining a growing faction within the party that argues open primaries allow Democrats to influence Republican candidate selection. The Texas Republican Party has listed closed primaries among its top priorities for the next legislative session.
Paxton took a more aggressive approach: his office joined a Texas GOP lawsuit filed last October seeking to strike down the state’s open primary system. That lawsuit contends open primaries violate the Republican Party’s constitutional right to freedom of association. Secretary of State Jane Nelson — who announced in early June she would step down next month — opposed the lawsuit.
Cornyn’s opposition puts him at odds with Abbott, Paxton, and the state party apparatus on a question that carries significant structural consequences for Texas politics.
By the Numbers
- Texas is one of 17 states with open primary systems.
- Turnout in Cornyn’s May Republican primary runoff came in at just under 8% of registered voters statewide.
- The state GOP has identified closed primaries as a top legislative priority for the upcoming session.
- Paxton joined the closed-primary lawsuit in October of last year.
Zoom Out
The debate over primary access structures is playing out in several states, with Republican parties in various regions arguing that open primaries dilute ideological cohesion while critics counter that closing primaries produces more extreme nominees who perform poorly in general elections.
Cal Jillson, a political science professor at Southern Methodist University, offered a measured assessment of the likely consequences. “If Texas adopted party registration and the Republican Party adopted a closed primary, in which only registered Republicans could participate, that would lower turnout in the primary and likely make that turnout more highly partisan and ideological,” Jillson said.
Cornyn’s warning echoes that analysis: lower and more ideologically concentrated primary turnout could produce nominees who struggle to hold the broad coalition that has kept Texas reliably Republican in statewide general elections for three decades.
The tensions are unfolding as Texas Democrats gathered in Corpus Christi this month seeking unity and a higher national profile, signaling the party intends to compete more aggressively for statewide offices.
What’s Next
The Texas GOP lawsuit challenging open primaries is working through the courts, and its outcome could force a legislative response regardless of where Abbott and the state party land on the issue. The state legislature will take up the closed-primary question as a stated party priority in the next session.
Whether Cornyn’s dissent carries enough weight to slow the effort remains uncertain. His May primary loss to Paxton leaves him without a Senate seat to defend, which may limit his leverage within the state party — but also frees him to argue his position without immediate electoral consequences.