Black Woman Cheated Out of Election Through Vote Harvesting Scandal

Black Woman Loses Election Amid Texas Mail-In Voter Fraud Scandal

In Frio County, Texas, a major voter fraud scandal has unfolded involving 15 individuals, including judges, city council members, former mayors, and a county commissioner. The case, which has been under investigation for months, raises significant concerns about the integrity of mail-in ballots and the vulnerability of small but politically important communities.

The Contested Election

At the center of the controversy is Mary Moore, a Black woman who ran for county judge in a Democratic primary runoff against Rochelle Camacho. Frio County, with a population of about 18,000 that is 77% Hispanic, has swung between parties in recent presidential elections, making its local contests highly competitive.

During the campaign, Moore faced rumors that she intended to eliminate taco trucks and dismantle community institutions — claims she firmly denied. Despite these attacks, the race was extremely close. Moore ultimately lost by just 72 votes, all of which came from absentee ballots.

Allegations of Vote Harvesting

Suspicious of the results, Moore began her own investigation. According to affidavits, she observed individuals connected to her opponent collecting what appeared to be carrier envelopes for absentee ballots at a local nursing home. Witnesses later told investigators that residents were pressured or instructed on how to vote, and that ballots were collected and transported in bulk.

Central to the case was Cheryl Denise Castillo, who allegedly admitted that candidates paid her via Cash App (sometimes through relatives’ accounts) to harvest ballots. Several residents confirmed she collected their ballots and, in some cases, suggested how they should vote. Castillo passed away in October 2024, but her role remains pivotal to the state’s evidence.

The Indictments

Authorities eventually arrested and indicted 15 individuals, including sitting officials, in what the Texas Attorney General’s office has described as a large-scale vote harvesting scheme. Phone records, video evidence, and payment records were cited as proof. Charges include vote harvesting and evidence tampering.

Defendants and their supporters, including the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), have claimed the prosecutions are racially and politically motivated, calling them “persecution, not prosecution.” They argue the defendants were simply working to increase voter turnout in a small community.

Legal Uncertainty

The case is complicated by ongoing legal challenges to Texas’s vote harvesting law, SB1. In September 2024, U.S. District Judge Xavier Rodriguez ruled the law unconstitutional, citing vagueness and First Amendment concerns. The ruling was stayed on appeal, meaning the law is still enforceable for now. If higher courts ultimately strike it down, the charges may collapse regardless of the evidence.

Broader Context

This scandal highlights how mail-in voting remains a flashpoint in U.S. politics. While widespread fraud is statistically rare, close elections in small jurisdictions can be swayed by even a few dozen questionable ballots. Similar controversies have emerged elsewhere, including New York, where campaign staffers were accused of filing fraudulent absentee applications.

For Mary Moore, losing by 72 absentee votes after being the target of racially charged rumors has made her case emblematic of both the potential for manipulation and the risks of disenfranchisement. Whether the prosecutions succeed or fail, the incident underscores the need to balance accessible voting with robust protections against abuse.