Indicted Democrat Judge Seeks Reelection as Texas Vote-Harvesting Case Expands

WATCH: Indicted Democrat Judge Seeks Reelection as Texas Vote-Harvesting Case Expands

In Frio County, Texas, a suspended county judge facing multiple felony election-fraud charges has decided to seek reelection—not after exoneration, not after trial, but while under indictment and barred from office without pay. 

The decision is legally permissible, but the implications are far more troubling.

On Dec. 5, Rochelle Lozano Camacho filed paperwork to run again for Frio County judge. 

The filing came just days before the state’s Dec. 8 primary deadline and months before her next court appearance, scheduled for March 12, 2026—nine days after Texas primary voters cast their ballots.

Camacho is currently suspended from office by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct following her May 2025 arrest in one of the most expansive vote-harvesting prosecutions in recent Texas history. 

According to indictments returned by a Frio County grand jury, Camacho faces three felony counts of vote harvesting, stemming from a two-year investigation led by the office of Ken Paxton.

The suspension order is unambiguous. 

Camacho is barred from exercising judicial authority and is receiving no compensation until her criminal case is resolved, dismissed, or reconsidered by the commission. 

Yet under Texas election law, suspension does not prohibit a candidate from seeking reelection. Camacho has chosen to exploit that gap.

The case surrounding her candidacy is the centerpiece of a coordinated ballot-harvesting investigation that has so far produced 15 criminal indictments, many involving elected officials or political operatives in South Texas.

Camacho was arrested on May 9, 2025, and booked into the Frio County Jail. 

Within days, the judicial conduct commission suspended her. Prosecutors allege she participated in an organized scheme that targeted elderly and mail-in voters, collecting ballots in violation of Texas law. 

Under reforms enacted in 2021, compensated ballot harvesting carries penalties of up to 10 years in prison and a $10,000 fine.

The investigation did not stop with Camacho. Indicted alongside her were city council members, school board officials, county commissioners, and a former elections administrator accused of tampering with evidence. 

In June 2025, a second grand jury expanded the case, adding nine more defendants—including former Bexar County Democrat Party chair Juan Manuel Medina and current Texas House candidate Cecilia Castellano.

Court filings describe a systematic operation: political actors approaching vulnerable voters under the disguise of assistance, taking possession of ballots, and, in some cases, exchanging payments via electronic apps to secure votes or voter information.

These are not paperwork errors. They are felony chain-of-custody violations.

Against that backdrop, Camacho’s decision to file for reelection is not merely bold. It is revealing.

The timing matters. Texas primaries are scheduled for March 3, 2026. Camacho’s next court appearance is March 12. Voters will be asked to pass judgment before hearing sworn testimony, before evidence is fully litigated, and before the legal system reaches a conclusion.

That sequencing is not accidental. It is strategic.

Equally notable is the silence. Despite the scope of the investigation and the number of Democrat officials implicated, prominent Democrats at the state and national level have offered little public comment. 

For years, Democrat leaders have insisted that voter fraud in Texas is virtually nonexistent. 

Yet in a single rural county, a two-year probe has resulted in indictments against a sitting county judge, multiple municipal officials, and election administrators.

Texas law treats ballot custody and election integrity as serious matters for a reason. Mail-in voting depends entirely on trust — trust that ballots are not intercepted, altered, or monetized by political intermediaries. 

When officials entrusted with administering elections are accused of subverting them, the damage extends beyond a single race.

Camacho’s candidacy sharpens that concern. It signals to voters that criminal indictment and judicial suspension are obstacles to be managed, not accountability thresholds to be respected. 

It also highlights a structural weakness in election law: the absence of safeguards to prevent indicted officials from using the ballot box as a shield against consequences.

This case is not about partisan advantage. Instead, it is about whether election law carries real consequences when violated by those in power.

A suspended judge accused of vote harvesting should not be campaigning as if nothing had happened. Voters deserve clarity, transparency, and accountability — not a procedural race against the court calendar.

Frio County now stands at the center of a test far larger than one election. The outcome will signal whether Texas treats election integrity as a principle or merely a slogan.

The post Indicted Democrat Judge Seeks Reelection as Texas Vote-Harvesting Case Expands appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.