A disagreement over same-sex marriage licenses exposed a significant policy difference among the three Republicans who sought the Lubbock County clerk nomination in 2026.
Jim Baxa said he would not personally execute a clerk’s certificate for a same-sex couple because doing so would conflict with his religious beliefs. However, he said he would allow another employee to process the application, ensuring the couple still received a license.
Sandy Garcia and Rebeca Gonzales took a different position. Both said the clerk’s office should process marriage applications without distinguishing between same-sex and opposite-sex couples.
The issue arose during a February candidate forum when Precinct 2 Justice of the Peace Susan Rowley asked the candidates whether they would issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
Candidates offer different answers
Baxa described his willingness to comply with the current marriage-licensing system as being “under duress.” He argued that the Texas Constitution defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman and that the U.S. Supreme Court decided the issue incorrectly in 2015.
He said he would not prevent a deputy clerk from executing a certificate for a same-sex couple. He also maintained that his proposed arrangement would avoid denying service because someone in the office would remain available to complete the application.
Baxa characterized his position as evidence that he was the most conservative candidate. He also sought to distinguish himself through proposals to control the clerk’s budget, improve efficiency and avoid adding employees.
Garcia said her office would follow the law and make every resident feel welcome. She objected to the possibility that someone seeking a county service could be made to feel ashamed because of the employee processing the request.
Gonzales similarly said her oath and professional duties would require her to issue the documents. She acknowledged having personal religious beliefs but said those beliefs would not override her responsibilities as a clerk’s office employee.
The candidates’ full positions were reported in the original Lubbock Lights article.
What the county clerk actually does
The discussion frequently used “license” and “certificate” interchangeably, but the clerk’s responsibilities involve several distinct steps.
Under the Texas Family Code, the county clerk reviews a marriage-license application and executes the clerk’s certificate if the applicants satisfy the legal requirements. A deputy clerk may perform the same official acts.
After an authorized person conducts the ceremony, that person completes the relevant portion of the license and returns it to the clerk. The clerk then records the returned license and sends it to the address listed by the couple.
The county clerk ordinarily does not perform the wedding ceremony. Texas law separately authorizes judges, justices of the peace and members of the clergy to conduct marriages.
That distinction matters because issuing and recording licenses are official clerk duties, while an individual judge or justice of the peace generally is not required to officiate weddings.
Federal ruling controls existing Texas restrictions
Texas’ Constitution and Family Code still contain language defining marriage as involving one man and one woman. Those provisions, however, cannot currently be enforced to prevent same-sex couples from marrying.
In its 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to license marriages between two people of the same sex and recognize same-sex marriages legally performed elsewhere.
Under the U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, controlling federal constitutional law takes precedence when it conflicts with state law. A state constitutional provision cannot authorize a local official to disregard a binding U.S. Supreme Court decision.
The Supreme Court again left Obergefell in place in November 2025 when it declined to hear an appeal from former Kentucky clerk Kim Davis. Davis had refused to issue licenses to same-sex couples after the 2015 ruling and was later held liable for violating a couple’s constitutional rights.
Congress also enacted the Respect for Marriage Act in 2022. The federal law requires federal and state recognition of marriages that were valid where they were performed, providing additional statutory protection for same-sex and interracial marriages.
Religious accommodations remain possible—but limited
A 2015 opinion from the Texas attorney general concluded that county clerks and employees may seek religious accommodations when issuing same-sex marriage licenses.
The opinion said a clerk could potentially delegate the task to a deputy, much as Baxa proposed. For employees, an accommodation might allow someone with a religious objection to avoid processing a particular application if another employee could do so without delaying or burdening the couple.
But the attorney general also emphasized that each claim would depend on its specific facts. It warned that refusing to issue licenses—or providing unequal service—could violate the constitutional rights recognized by the Supreme Court.
The document was an advisory legal opinion, not a court judgment authorizing county offices to deny licenses. Its accommodation analysis assumes the office will continue providing same-sex couples access to marriage on the same terms as other couples.
Garcia becomes Republican nominee
Garcia led the March 3 Republican primary with 45.9% of the vote. Baxa received approximately 37%, while Gonzales finished with 17.1%.
Because Garcia did not initially receive a majority, she and Baxa were expected to advance to a May runoff. Four days after the primary, however, Baxa withdrew and endorsed Garcia, saying he wanted to promote Republican unity.
His withdrawal canceled the runoff and made Garcia the Republican nominee. She is scheduled to face Democratic nominee Kerri Poeling Padilla in the November 3 general election, according to KTTZ’s election update.
The primary dispute did not result in Baxa winning the office, but it clarified the policy choice for voters: whether personal religious objections should be managed through delegation or whether every clerk handling marriage records should process all legally valid applications.
