Composite 5.42 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
Lands in the Unfit band at credit 573, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)
- No military service on record
Chip Roy has no military service record. Prior to Congress he served as a federal prosecutor and as chief of staff to Sen. Ted Cruz and first assistant attorney general of Texas. No service badge applies; the record is scored on civilian public conduct only.
The 14 measures
Each measure is scored 0–10 against an anchored example, with a cited source. Hover/expand why? for the reasoning.
| # | Measure | Score | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| M01 | Duty to Constitution & Rule of Law | 8 | why?On the defining oath test of the era, Roy voted AGAINST the objections to the Arizona and Pennsylvania electoral certifications, saying on the floor it 'may sign my political death warrant', upholding the constitutional count against his own party and his own base at direct personal cost. He had earlier publicly refused to join the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus, calling it 'a dangerous violation of federalism.' His separate parliamentary objection to seating 67 members was a consistency stunt that failed 371-2, not an attempt to defeat the count. No criterion-8 conduct; affirmative defense of the constitutional process. Held below the apex tier reserved for sustained career-defining sacrifice. [source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 3 | why?Among the lowest bipartisan-cooperation records in the House, GovTrack ranked him near the bottom (3rd-least) for joining bipartisan bills in the 118th Congress. This is conduct (a chosen posture of non-cooperation and brinkmanship), distinct from policy. Offset modestly by genuine cross-aisle work on the stock-trading ban with Rep. Magaziner (D) and the Courthouse Ethics Act with Sens. Cornyn/Coons; the net remains low. [source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 3 | why?Opened a hearing on anti-Asian violence, two days after the Atlanta spa killings of six Asian women, with a 'find all the rope in Texas and get a tall oak tree' lynching reference, then doubled down ('I meant it,' 'no apologies'). A documented anti-belonging instance directed into a hearing about a targeted community, with no contrition. Weighs heavily. Not elevated to a capping crit-10 flag because it is a single documented remark rather than a sustained directed-incitement pattern, but it is a serious break from Persons-of-Equal-Worth. [source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 6 | why?No documented weaponization of state power against rivals. The record runs the other way on the marquee test, he refused the Texas v. PA amicus on federalism grounds and voted to certify. Procedural hardball (shutdown brinkmanship, holds) is aggressive use of legitimate minority tools, not abuse of office against opponents. No criterion-class conduct; held at upper-middle for the confrontational posture. [source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 4 | why?Habitually combative rhetoric ('tyrannical overlords,' attacks on colleagues) sits at the edge of the standard. The lynching-metaphor episode and his refusal to walk it back are the dominant documented drag. Not a sustained enemy-making PATTERN casting citizens as enemies who don't belong, much of the heat is policy heat, which the standard does not score, but the unretracted 2021 remark holds this well below the midline. [source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 7 | why?Affirmatively leads on fiduciary cleanliness, authored a bipartisan member stock-trading ban explicitly to remove 'the appearance of self-dealing.' The lone drag is a 2021 House mask-rule fine ($500, not appealed), a decorum/rules violation he framed as defiance of 'tyrannical overlords.' Minor against an otherwise clean fiduciary record. [source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 8 | why?Met the higher active-duty bar, calling out his OWN side at cost. He told his caucus and base, on the record, that he would not vote to reject the election and that doing so might end his career, breaking with the dominant pressure inside his party. The active call-out duty, met under real risk. [source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 6 | why?No documented instance of using a discretionary office for private benefit or self-exemption. The mask-fine defiance is a minor self-exemption from a chamber rule. Solid-middle on the discretion test; no affirmative high-mark sacrifice of personal advantage on record. [source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 5 | why?No documented private-vs-public contempt gap, his combative public posture appears consistent with his off-camera reputation, which cuts both ways for this measure. Insufficient documented evidence of a hidden double-standard either direction; honest middle. [source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 5 | why?Represents a deep-red district and his confrontational record broadly tracks that constituency, but a chosen brinkmanship posture (shutdown/debt-ceiling holds) at times serves a national factional agenda over district service delivery. No documented donor-capture. Honest middle. [source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 7 | why?Scored ONLY on office-attributable enrichment, not raw wealth. No documented self-dealing, family payments, office-info trades, or foreign-government revenue; he is in fact a lead sponsor of a ban on member stock trading. The mask fine is a rules matter, not enrichment. Clean on the enrichment standard, held below apex for absence of a long disclosure track record. [source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 5 | why?Repeated institutional friction: the mask-rule fine, blanket holds, and speaker-fight obstruction reflect a spectacle-over-regular-order posture in tension with institutional decorum. Counterweighted by genuine institutional-reform work (rules-process demands, judicial-transparency act). Net middle, neither a decorum exemplar nor a wrecker. [source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 4 | why?On the central election-integrity question he was truthful against his side's pressure (he refused the stolen-election framing and certified). The drag is candor of character rather than systematic factual falsehood: the lynching-metaphor episode and his 'I meant it' doubling-down show a willingness to inflame and not own harm. No documented sustained-falsehood pattern; held below midline by the unretracted incendiary conduct. [source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 7 | why?Demonstrates real substantive command of fiscal, appropriations, and rules/procedure detail, the bill-reading-time and spending-process demands reflect mastery of mechanics over talking points, and the stock-trading and judicial-ethics bills are substantive drafting. Substance present; held below apex for a narrow issue focus. [source] |
Why not higher, the points withheld
The standard is the seat; the ceiling is a perfect 10. Every withheld point traces to documented conduct, weighed where the measures and attributes say it belongs, shown openly here, the same way the earned points are.
| Where | Documented conduct | Mitigation weighed |
|---|---|---|
| M02 | Near-bottom bipartisan-cooperation ranking (GovTrack 3rd-least, 118th Congress); chosen posture of non-cooperation and shutdown/debt-ceiling brinkmanship ↳ institution-over-faction / cross-aisle cooperation as conduct | Genuine bipartisan work on the stock-trading ban (Magaziner-D) and Courthouse Ethics Act (Cornyn/Coons) keeps it off the floor |
| M03 | March 2021 'find all the rope in Texas and get a tall oak tree' lynching reference opening a hearing on anti-Asian violence, two days after the Atlanta killings of six Asian women; doubled down with 'I meant it' and 'no apologies' ↳ Persons of Equal Worth, documented anti-belonging instance, no contrition | Single documented remark, not a sustained directed-incitement pattern; below the capping crit-10 bar |
| M05 | Habitually combative rhetoric and the unretracted 2021 lynching metaphor ↳ rhetorical restraint | Most other heat is policy heat, which the standard does not score; not a sustained enemy-making pattern |
| M13 | Lynching-metaphor doubling-down, refusal to own demonstrable harm ↳ candor / honesty-of-character | Truthful against his side on the stolen-election framing; no systematic factual-falsehood pattern |
| M06 | 2021 House mask-rule fine ($500), not appealed; framed as defiance of 'tyrannical overlords' ↳ fiduciary/rules-compliance decorum | Offset by lead sponsorship of a member stock-trading ban to remove appearance of self-dealing |
| M12 | Mask fine, blanket holds, speaker-fight obstruction, spectacle-over-regular-order friction ↳ institutional decorum | Counterweighted by substantive rules-process and judicial-transparency reform work |
The Four Pillars, worthy to be followed?
A separate axis from the 14 measures. The measures ask did their conduct meet the standard; the Pillars ask is this someone worthy to be elevated and followed at all. The two can diverge, when they do, the divergence is the finding.
| # | Pillar | Score | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| I | Trust & Loyalty
| 7 | why?Attributes: Courage, Conviction, Steadiness, the Jan 6 vote to certify against his own base ('may sign my political death warrant') and the refusal of the Texas v. PA amicus on principle are real evidence of Courage and Loyalty to the oath over the faction. Drag toward Self-Interest is minimal here; the posture cost him politically. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 6 | why?Attributes: Conviction, Authenticity, he is consistent and says what he means, which serves Authenticity but, in the lynching-remark doubling-down, works against Self-Reflection and Teachability. Held at middle by the absence of contrition on a documented harm. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 6 | why?Attributes: Accountability, Stewardship, leads on fiduciary cleanliness (stock-trading ban) and used minority procedural tools rather than abusing power. Drag toward Exploitation is absent, but the brinkmanship posture and incendiary rhetoric temper Protection. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 5 | why?Attributes: Integrity, Moral Courage on the election count; but the unretracted lynching metaphor and a near-zero cooperation record drag toward Favoritism/Ego. A mixed legacy: a genuine constitutional-fidelity high mark sitting beside a real civility failure. |
| TOTAL: Moderate | 24/40 |
Total 24/40, Adequate-to-mixed. The trust pillar holds highest on the strength of the Jan 6 conduct; the legacy pillar is dragged by the documented rhetoric failure and the cooperation deficit.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“I was not going to, and I will not be voting to reject the elections, and it may sign my political death warrant.”
House floor, on refusing to object to the electoral certification · Texas Tribune / floor record · PRINCIPLED · cite
“Respectfully, I will not join because I believe the case itself represents a dangerous violation of federalism & sets a precedent to have one state asking federal courts to police the voting procedures of other states.”
Refusing to sign the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus brief · The Hill / KXAN · PRINCIPLED · cite
“There's an old saying in Texas … find all the rope in Texas and get a tall oak tree.”
Opening remarks at a House Judiciary hearing on anti-Asian violence, two days after the Atlanta spa killings; he later said 'I meant it' and offered 'no apologies' · NBC News / CBS News · CONTESTED · cite
“Let's actually focus on eliminating the corruption, no one should have the appearance of self-dealing.”
On the bipartisan Restore Trust in Congress Act to ban member stock trading · Capitol Trades / roy.house.gov · ACCOUNTABILITY · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Charles Eugene "Chip" Roy. U.S. Representative for Texas's 21st Congressional District since 2019 (TX-21, Austin/San Antonio/Hill Country). Former federal prosecutor; chief of staff to Sen. Ted Cruz; first assistant attorney general of Texas under Ken Paxton. Member of the House Freedom Caucus. Ran for Texas Attorney General in 2026, losing the Republican primary runoff to state Sen. Mayes Middleton on May 26, 2026; his House term runs through January 2027.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
DW-NOMINATE far-right; among the lowest bipartisan-cooperation rankings in the House (GovTrack ranked him near the bottom for joining bipartisan bills in the 118th Congress). Despite that posture, authored the bipartisan Restore Trust in Congress Act (2025, with Rep. Seth Magaziner, D) to ban member stock trading, and co-led the Courthouse Ethics and Transparency Act with Sens. Cornyn and Coons. A leader of the 2023 holdout bloc that extracted rules concessions (bill-reading time, motion-to-vacate threshold) in the McCarthy speaker fight. Procedural and fiscal-process specialist. Policy positions are not scored in either direction per the framework.
3. Constitutional Moments
The marquee moment is constitutional fidelity at personal cost: Roy refused to sign the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus brief (December 2020), calling it 'a dangerous violation of federalism,' and on January 6, 2021 voted AGAINST the objections to the Arizona and Pennsylvania electoral certifications, saying it might 'sign my political death warrant.' His separate parliamentary objection to seating 67 colleagues was a consistency maneuver that failed 371-2, recorded as a stunt, not an attempt to defeat the count. No criterion-8 process-subversion conduct on record.
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
Habitually combative, and at one documented point harmful: in March 2021 Roy opened a hearing on anti-Asian violence, two days after the Atlanta spa killings of six Asian women, with a 'find all the rope in Texas and get a tall oak tree' lynching reference, then refused to retract it ('I meant it,' 'no apologies'). That is a real anti-belonging instance the standard weighs heavily. Much of his other heat is policy heat, which the standard does not score, and it does not rise to a sustained directed-incitement pattern, so it is a serious civility drag rather than a capping flag.
5. Fiduciary Profile
No documented office-attributable enrichment: no self-dealing finding, no family-payment or office-info trading, no foreign-government revenue. Roy is in fact a lead sponsor of a bipartisan ban on member stock trading aimed at removing 'the appearance of self-dealing.' The one fiduciary/rules drag is a 2021 House mask-rule fine ($500, not appealed), which he framed as defiance of 'tyrannical overlords', a decorum matter, not enrichment.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
No documented Severity-class conduct under the eight criteria. Specifically: he did NOT sign the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus and voted to certify, so no criterion-8 process-subversion flag applies. The 2021 lynching metaphor is an ugly, unretracted single remark but does not meet the criterion-10 bar of a sustained directed enemy-making/incitement PATTERN; it is scored hard on the civility measures instead. Flag count: zero.
7. What The Framework Says
A genuinely mixed record that resists the caricature. On the era's defining oath test, Roy did the hard, costly, correct thing, refusing the Texas v. PA amicus on federalism grounds and voting to certify the count against his own base, on the record, knowing it might end his career. That is real constitutional fidelity, and the standard credits it (M01/M07). Set against it is a real civility failure the standard refuses to wave away, the 2021 lynching metaphor aimed into a hearing on violence against Asian Americans, doubled down on without contrition, and one of the lowest cross-aisle cooperation records in the House. The fiduciary record is clean and even affirmatively reform-minded. Honest middle: principled where it counted most, with a documented character drag that keeps the legacy mixed.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member profile · House Committee on Ethics statement (mask fine)
Tier 2: GovTrack report card · Lugar Center Bipartisan Index
Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · GovTrack · Voteview / DW-NOMINATE · Wikipedia
Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.