A Fort Worth district judge denied a legal request for Tarrant County to add back the 92 locations eliminated from the approved list of polling sites for this November’s midterm elections.
Four current and former Fort Worth officials — Deborah Peoples, Camille Rodriguez, Kathleen Hicks and Maryellen Hicks — sued Tarrant County, the county elections administrator who proposed the list of sites and the Republican commissioners who approved the list earlier this month. The women alleged that the site reductions will disproportionately impact Black and Latino voters and requested a temporary injunction that would have reinstated the 92 sites for Election Day on Nov. 3.
Republican Judge J. Patrick Gallagher of the 96th District Court heard more than four hours of testimony from elections administrator Clint Ludwig, the four plaintiffs and two other witnesses in his downtown Fort Worth courtroom before denying the request for an injunction. He did not explain the decision.
That means Tarrant County will continue to use the list of polling sites approved by county commissioners Sept. 1. The list includes 224 sites for Election Day and 47 for early voting — a downsizing from the 316 Election Day sites and 50 early voting sites used in the 2022 midterms.
In a statement after the verdict, the plaintiffs and their attorneys emphasized that although Gallagher denied the request for an injunction, he did not dismiss the lawsuit or rule that the reductions did not disproportionately discriminate against racial minorities.
“The testimony of the Tarrant County election administrator raised serious questions about the process and intent of why these voting sites in predominantly minority areas were eliminated,” the statement read. “This means everyone has to redouble our efforts to make sure everybody votes.”
A spokesperson for the district attorney’s office, which represents the county in litigation, did not immediately return a request for comment.
During the hearing, assistant district attorney Stephen Lund said Gallagher should deny the plaintiffs’ request for an injunction and dismiss the entire case. Reinstating the 92 sites would disrupt the election because county election staff would not have been able to meet state-mandated requirements to reprogram and publicly test the voting machines in time for early voting Oct. 19, according to Ludwig’s testimony.
“This case has all kinds of jurisdictional problems,” Lund said.
During his testimony, Ludwig said he and elections staff crafted the proposed list of sites based on input from county commissioners, who wanted sites close to public transportation but not too close to other polling sites. The approved 224 sites for Election Day are evenly distributed across the four county precincts as requested by commissioners.
The plaintiffs testified that the reduction in sites will burden voters in predominantly Black and Latino neighborhoods and low-income ZIP codes, where residents are more likely to work long hours and may not have reliable transportation or childcare to support taking the time to vote.
Ludwig said he did not consider whether the site reduction would disproportionately impact voters of color because voter registration data does not track racial demographics. He also did not consider whether ZIP codes with minority-majority populations would be more severely impacted because state requirements about distribution are specific to voting precincts, not ZIP codes.
The elections administrator testified that he did not solicit input or feedback from individual racial minorities or organizations representing them regarding the addition or elimination of polling sites. He said he heard concerns about racial disparities during the commissioners court meetings when the sites were discussed and dozens of speakers demanded an increase in sites rather than a decrease. However, he said, he did not follow up with those speakers after the meetings to address concerns or identify solutions.
Supporters of the site reduction said the cuts would help save costs. Ludwig testified that although the reduction did save dollars, his office did not explore any other cost-saving measures before making the proposal.
Cecilia Lenzen is a government accountability reporter for the Fort Worth Report. Contact her at cecilia.lenzen@fortworthreport.org.
At the Fort Worth Report, news decisions are made independently of our board members and financial supporters. Read more about our editorial independence policy here.
This <a target=”_blank” href=”https://fortworthreport.org/2026/10/13/fort-worth-judge-denies-request-to-reinstate-92-polling-sites-for-tarrant-county-midterms/”>article</a> first appeared on <a target=”_blank” href=”https://fortworthreport.org”>Fort Worth Report</a> and is republished here under a <a target=”_blank” href=”https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/”>Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src=”https://i0.wp.com/fortworthreport.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/cropped-favicon.png?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1″ style=”width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;”>
<img id=”republication-tracker-tool-source” src=”https://fortworthreport.org/?republication-pixel=true&post=828544&ga4=2820184429″ style=”width:1px;height:1px;”><script> PARSELY = { autotrack: false, onload: function() { PARSELY.beacon.trackPageView({ url: “https://fortworthreport.org/2026/10/13/fort-worth-judge-denies-request-to-reinstate-92-polling-sites-for-tarrant-county-midterms/”, urlref: window.location.href }); } } </script> <script id=”parsely-cfg” src=”//cdn.parsely.com/keys/fortworthreport.org/p.js”></script>