Skip to main content
The Full Record
Menu
Portrait of Nathan JohnsonPhoto: senate.texas.gov

TX · Officeholder

Nathan Johnson

DState Senator · District 16

On the ballot Nov 3, 2026: Attorney General of Texas

Biography

Nathan Johnson is the Democratic nominee. A Dallas attorney and mediator, he has been a state senator since 2019 and says he has passed 134 bills across water, energy, education, health care and criminal justice. He campaigns on investigating corruption in the public and private sectors, consumer protection and antitrust enforcement, partnering with district attorneys, and suing the federal government over what he calls unconstitutional border policy.[1][2][3]

Johnson holds a bachelor's degree in physics from the University of Arizona and a law degree from the University of Texas.[3] He practices trial litigation and dispute resolution as a litigator and mediator with the firm Thompson Coburn in Dallas.[3][1]

Johnson was first elected to the Texas Senate in 2018 and has served since 2019, representing District 16 in Dallas County.[3] He is the Democratic nominee for attorney general in the November 3, 2026 general election.[1][4]

Researched from the cited sources on 2026-10-21.

On the ballot

Votes by issue

Their recorded votes on bills that divided the chamber (unanimous votes left out), grouped by topic. A bill can sit under more than one topic. "With" and "against" compare each vote with how most Democrats voted. How topics are assigned

Where they stood out

Voted against most of their party on 61 of 578 party-divided votes on file.

Most often on: Rights & public safety (26), Education & families (16), Health & care (16)

  • Relating to a prohibition on the making and acceptance of political contributions during a special legislative session

    What it does: Bars anyone from giving political contributions to statewide officeholders, legislators or committees supporting them during a special legislative session that begins before September 1 of an odd-numbered year, and re…

    Voted yes · most Democrats voted no · Democrats 3–5, Republicans 18–1

    Aug 26, 2025Official record ↗

  • Relating to a prohibition on the making and acceptance of political contributions during a special legislative session

    What it does: Bars anyone from giving political contributions to statewide officeholders, legislators or committees supporting them during a special legislative session that begins before September 1 of an odd-numbered year, and re…

    Voted yes · most Democrats voted no · Democrats 3–5, Republicans 18–1

    Aug 26, 2025Official record ↗

  • Relating to expressive activities at public institutions of higher education

    What it does: On the version voted May 14, 2025: Limits campus free-expression protections at public colleges to enrolled students and employees, excludes defamation, harassment, incitement, obscenity and threats, and ends the trad…

    Voted yes · most Democrats voted no · Democrats 2–9, Republicans 20–0

    Jun 1, 2025Official record ↗

  • Suspending limitations on conference committee jurisdiction on S.B. No. 2972

    What it does: Suspends Senate rules so the conference committee on SB 2972, on campus expressive activities, can change text not in disagreement: keeping 'content-neutral' in a provision on restrictions on expressive activities and…

    Voted yes · most Democrats voted no · Democrats 2–9, Republicans 20–0

    Jun 1, 2025Official record ↗

  • Relating to ineligibility to serve as a poll watcher

    What it does: On the version voted May 12, 2025: Changes poll watcher ineligibility from a conviction for any offense tied to election conduct to a first or second degree felony or a felony tied to election conduct; requires the ap…

    Voted yes · most Democrats voted no · Democrats 3–8, Republicans 20–0

    Jun 1, 2025Official record ↗

How this is counted

Their votes on the most contested roll calls

The votes in their chamber that came out closest and most divided by party, among those they voted on. How we rank

See all their split votes

Substantive votes concern legislation or nominations; procedural votes concern how the chamber considers them. A Yes vote applies to the motion shown, which may not be final passage.

HB 18 · TX SENATE

Relating to a restriction on the acceptance of political contributions and the making of certain political expenditures by a member of the legislature and certain political committees during certain periods in which a member is absent from a legislative session; authorizing a civil penalty

NoVOTED

Motion: Final passage (third reading)

Bars legislators who leave the state to block legislative action, and committees supporting them, from accepting contributions above a daily per diem from any one donor or spending campaign money on travel, food or lodging for the absence; violations carry civil penalties up to $5,000.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 18–8·Substantive·Sep 4, 2025Roll call ↗
HB 18 · TX SENATE

Relating to a restriction on the acceptance of political contributions and the making of certain political expenditures by a member of the legislature and certain political committees during certain periods in which a member is absent from a legislative session; authorizing a civil penalty

NoVOTED

Motion: Passage to third reading (second reading)

On the version voted Sep 4, 2025: Bars legislators who leave the state to block legislative action, and committees supporting them, from accepting contributions above a daily per diem from any one donor or spending campaign money on travel, food or lodging for the absence; violations carry civil penalties up to $5,000.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 18–8·Substantive·Sep 3, 2025Roll call ↗
HB 7 · TX SENATE

Relating to prohibitions on the manufacture and provision of abortion-inducing drugs, including the jurisdiction of and effect of certain judgments by courts within and outside this state with respect to the manufacture and provision of those drugs, and to protections from certain counteractions under the laws of other states and jurisdictions; authorizing qui tam actions

NoVOTED

Motion: Final passage (third reading)

On the version voted Aug 28, 2025: Bans manufacturing or distributing abortion-inducing drugs in Texas, and mailing, delivering or prescribing them to or from Texas, with exceptions such as medical emergencies. Only private qui tam suits (at least $100,000 per violation) enforce it; women who take the drugs cannot be sued.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 17–8·Substantive·Sep 3, 2025Roll call ↗
SB 8 · TX SENATE

Relating to the designation and use of certain spaces and facilities according to sex; authorizing a civil penalty and a private civil right of action

NoVOTED

Motion: Concur in House amendments

On the version voted Aug 28, 2025: Tables an amendment that would strike the bill's provisions barring courts from blocking its enforcement or certifying classes, and making parties who seek such court orders pay the other side's costs and attorney fees.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 18–8·Substantive·Sep 3, 2025Roll call ↗
HB 15 · TX SENATE

Relating to certain files maintained by a law enforcement agency regarding certain employees of the agency

NoVOTED

Motion: Final passage (third reading)

On the version voted Aug 28, 2025: Requires law enforcement agencies to keep a confidential file on each officer, holding records outside the personnel file, including misconduct allegations lacking sufficient evidence. Allows review by hiring agencies, the state licensing commission, and complainants and alleged victims; bars other release.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 18–9·Substantive·Sep 2, 2025Roll call ↗
HB 27 · TX SENATE

Relating to a groundwater study of certain aquifers underlying the territory of the Neches and Trinity Valleys Groundwater Conservation District by the Texas Water Development Board before the issuance of permits or permit amendments by the district

YesVOTED

Motion: Final passage (third reading)

As amended by the Senate, requires the Texas Water Development Board to study how much groundwater can be pumped indefinitely from aquifers under the Neches and Trinity Valleys district and effects of proposed pumping and exports, reporting by January 12, 2027, without pausing new permits.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 26–1·Substantive·Sep 2, 2025Roll call ↗
HB 27 · TX SENATE

Relating to a groundwater study of certain aquifers underlying the territory of the Neches and Trinity Valleys Groundwater Conservation District by the Texas Water Development Board before the issuance of permits or permit amendments by the district

YesVOTED

Motion: Passage to third reading (second reading)

As amended by the Senate, requires the Texas Water Development Board to study how much groundwater can be pumped indefinitely from aquifers under the Neches and Trinity Valleys district and effects of proposed pumping and exports, reporting by January 12, 2027, without pausing new permits.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 26–1·Substantive·Sep 2, 2025Roll call ↗
HB 27 · TX SENATE

Relating to a groundwater study of certain aquifers underlying the territory of the Neches and Trinity Valleys Groundwater Conservation District by the Texas Water Development Board before the issuance of permits or permit amendments by the district

YesVOTED

Motion: Adopt Floor Amendment No. 1 (Nichols)

As amended by the Senate, requires the Texas Water Development Board to study how much groundwater can be pumped indefinitely from aquifers under the Neches and Trinity Valleys district and effects of proposed pumping and exports, reporting by January 12, 2027, without pausing new permits.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 20–7·Substantive·Sep 2, 2025Roll call ↗
HB 15 · TX SENATE

Relating to certain files maintained by a law enforcement agency regarding certain employees of the agency

NoVOTED

Motion: Passage to third reading (second reading)

On the version voted Aug 28, 2025: Requires law enforcement agencies to keep a confidential file on each officer, holding records outside the personnel file, including misconduct allegations lacking sufficient evidence. Allows review by hiring agencies, the state licensing commission, and complainants and alleged victims; bars other release.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 18–9·Substantive·Sep 2, 2025Roll call ↗
HB 7 · TX SENATE

Relating to prohibitions on the manufacture and provision of abortion-inducing drugs, including the jurisdiction of and effect of certain judgments by courts within and outside this state with respect to the manufacture and provision of those drugs, and to protections from certain counteractions under the laws of other states and jurisdictions; authorizing qui tam actions

NoVOTED

Motion: Passage to third reading (second reading)

On the version voted Aug 28, 2025: Bans manufacturing or distributing abortion-inducing drugs in Texas, and mailing, delivering or prescribing them to or from Texas, with exceptions such as medical emergencies. Only private qui tam suits (at least $100,000 per violation) enforce it; women who take the drugs cannot be sued.

AI summary — read the bill text ↗
Passed 17–9·Substantive·Sep 2, 2025Roll call ↗

Showing 10 of 1306 votes in this collection. Coverage may be incomplete; each entry links to the official record.