Tag Archives: Texas attorney general

legal news, State news

AG Paxton faces possible felony indictment

Do you ever wonder why people vote for political candidates who actually admit to doing something that could get them into serious legal trouble?

How did Texans, therefore, manage to elect a state attorney general — Ken Paxton of McKinney — who had acknowledged he solicited investment clients for a friend without giving the state proper notification?

It’s called “securities fraud.” It’s a serious deal. A Collin County grand jury is going to decide — maybe soon — whether to indict the state’s top lawyer on charges that he committed a felony.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/07/01/potential-case-against-paxton-appears-grow-serious/

Now, before you get your underwear all knotted up, let’s understand a couple of things.

Paxton is a Republican. Collin County is a heavily Republican county north of Dallas. A special prosecutor — ostensibly an independent-thinking individual — has been brought in to present the case against Paxton, a former state representative from McKinney.

This really and truly isn’t the partisan witch hunt that’s been alleged in Travis County, where another grand jury indicted then-Gov. Rick Perry of abuse of power and coercion of a public official.

No. This case ought to smell differently to those critics.

The most damaging element of this probe would seem to be Paxton’s own acknowledgment that he did something wrong.

And on top of all of that, he’s hired a high-powered former federal judge, Joe Kendall of Dallas, to represent him.

I don’t know what that tells you, but it tells me that Paxton thinks there might be something upon which the grand jury would indict him. He’s going to need the best legal help he can get.

Getting back to my initial question, given that all this was known prior to the election this past November: How in the world did Texans elect this guy?

 

legal news, local news, State news

Judge will marry gays, if duty calls

Potter County Judge Nancy Tanner is on record already on an issue that well could generate a good bit of controversy.

Back when she was running for the office to which she was elected, Tanner — along with her four Republican primary opponents — took part in a candidate forum sponsored by Panhandle PBS. I was privileged to be one of the journalists questioning the candidates.

One of the panelists asked all the candidates a most probing question: Given that Texas law gives county judges the authority to perform marriage ceremonies, would you — as county judge — be willing to perform a ceremony uniting a same-sex couple in matrimony?

Some of the candidates hemmed and hawed. One of them said “no,” he wouldn’t do it.

Tanner’s response? She was unequivocal. If the courts rule that gay marriage is legal in Texas, then she would follow the law. She would marry anyone with a valid marriage license. That would be her responsibility as county judge and she would perform it.

Her answer was straightforward as it could have been. It didn’t harm her at the polls, as she won the GOP primary outright and went on to be elected county judge in November 2014.

As of this morning, the issue hasn’t yet presented itself to Judge Tanner. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has said county clerks can refuse to issue marriage licenses if they have a religious objection to the Supreme Court’s ruling that legalized gay marriage.

There’s been no word that I’ve heard about whether Potter County Clerk Julie Smith is going to follow the law or ignore it, per Paxton’s decision.

Tanner’s take on the issue is clear. What’s cloudy and muddled is whether another countywide elected official, Smith, is going to follow the law.

Stay tuned. This could get dicey.

legal news

It’s official: Texas AG says clerks can flout the law

3 Comments

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has just told county clerks they don’t have to uphold the sacred oath to which they swore when they took office.

I don’t know where to begin.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/06/28/paxton-county-clerks-can-deny-same-sex-marriage-li/

Paxton issued a statement today that said county clerks do not have to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples if they have religious objections. He has challenged the legal opinion of a majority of the nine men and women who sit on the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled 5-4 this past week that gay marriage is now legal in the United States of America.

Texas county clerks, according to Paxton, are now free to flout federal law.

“Our religious liberties find protection in state and federal constitutions and statutes,” Paxton said in a statement. “While they are indisputably our first freedom, we should not let them be our last.”

Yes, they do “find protection” in the law. But there’s another factor that Paxton and others who oppose the court ruling are giving short shrift. It is that county clerks — as well as state attorneys general, I should add — take an oath to follow federal and state law. They swear to God that they’ll do that.

Is that oath now rendered moot? Why bother, then, to swear to uphold the Constitution?

 

political news, State news

State AG is — what? — a criminal?

Call me a prude. Heck, you might even accuse me of having more than a touch of righteous sanctimony.

However, I am of the belief that a state’s top law enforcement official — its attorney general — ought to be clean as a spit-shined boot. There should be zero question about how he conducts his personal and/or business affairs.

Well, Texans, welcome to a new world.

We have an attorney general who’s been fined by the state for soliciting investment clients without following all the rules the state sets down for such activity.

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/05/02/paxton-violated-securities-law-gets-reprimand/

Ken Paxton is a former Republican state representative who was elected attorney general in November. The Texas Securities Board has fined the AG-to-be $1,000 for failing to register under the law his investment solicitation activity.

Paxton has waived his right to appeal the sanction, which is tantamount to admitting he broke the law.

OK, the guy didn’t commit a violent crime. He didn’t rob a bank or hold anyone hostage. However, he broke state law.

Now he’s about to take an oath in which he will defend the Texas Constitution and vow to enforce all the laws of the state.

A Paxton spokesman told this to the Texas Tribune: “As for Friday’s order, Paxton spokesman Anthony Holm said the campaign ‘took immediate action and proactively communicated the Texas Tribune’s questions to the state board.’

We asked the board to treat us like every other citizen of the state and that they take all necessary time to review our filings,’ Holm said. ‘Due to an administrative oversight, we have paid an administrative fine of $1,000. We are pleased this matter has been resolved and a speedy resolution has been reached.'”

Actually, the Texas attorney general isn’t like “every other citizen of the state.” He should be clean. Spotless. He shouldn’t get into the kind of trouble that found Ken Paxton.

Aw, what the heck. Texas politics apparently doesn’t take that kind of thing into account.

 

political news, State news

Greg Abbott: plaintiff's lawyer in chief

It’s 31 lawsuits — and counting — for Greg Abbott, the Texas attorney general who’s about to become the state’s next governor.

Abbott has sued President Obama over the president’s recent executive order that protects about 5 million illegal immigrants from immediate deportation. He made good on his campaign promise to sue Obama over this issue.

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/12/03/greg-abbott-sues-over-executive-action-immigration/

I must pose some inquiries about this action.

First, how much are these lawsuits costing the state? It strikes me that Abbott — a self-proclaimed fiscally conservative Republican — is running up an incalculable legal tab as he challenges the president over immigration, health care reform and whatever else.

Second, as a Republican who has support tort reform efforts to rein in the cost of court settlements, he’s becoming one of those dreaded plaintiff’s lawyers Republican officeholders have loved to hate. We’ve all heard the mantra that Democrats are plaintiff-friendly, while Republicans look out for the interests of defendants in civil court proceedings. Texans seem to have sided with the GOP on that one, electing an all-Republican state Supreme Court, which rules fairly routinely in favor of business interests who’ve been sued by plaintiffs.

And third, does Abbott really have a case against the president or is he being pressured by the TEA party wing of the GOP to do something — dammit! — to stick it in Barack Obama’s ear? The Texas Tribune reports: “‘It’s ill advised. I don’t think he has standing. He gets the basic terminology wrong, and he protests too much when he says he’s not politicizing it, because all of it is simply about the politics of it,’ said Michael Olivas, an immigration lawyer and professor at the University of Houston. ‘He characterizes what the president did as an executive order — it is not an executive order. It’s executive action.'”

I didn’t used to consider Abbott to be a fiery conservative. I’ve long thought of him as a more thoughtful politician. He could be feeling the heat from the right wing of his party to carry through with his campaign pledge to sue the president one more time.

Well, he’s got 31 lawsuits in the can already. For my money, enough is enough.

 

 

Uncategorized

Why not let AG defend you, governor?

State Rep. Joe Deshotel wants to know: Why is Gov. Rick Perry hiring a private lawyer at $450 per hour to defend him in a possible court case when the state attorney general, a pal of his, is available?

And why should Texas taxpayers pay for the private lawyer?

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/04/25/lawmaker-wants-ag-ruling-perry-legal-bill/

Why, indeed, to both questions, governor?

Deshotel is a Port Arthur Democrat — and a lawyer himself. He’s posed the question as a grand jury investigates whether Perry acted improperly in vetoing $7.5 million for the Travis County district attorney’s office and then promised to restore the money if the DA, Rosemary Lehmberg, resigned. Lehmberg had been ticketed for drunken driving this past April. She also runs the office that is charged with investigating state officials’ conduct.

Oh, and she’s also a Democrat. Perry, of course, is a Republican. Coincidence? Probably not.

Deshotel has sent Attorney General Greg Abbott a four-page letter inquiring about this matter. “What authority, if any, can the attorney general authorize hiring private counsel for the governor?” Deshotel asks. “If authority to hire private counsel exists, how would the attorney general authorize payment for such private counsel?”

One of the AG’s duties as set forth in the Texas Constitution is to defend state officials who get themselves into potential legal trouble. Perry might find himself in that position if a Travis County jury indicts him. But he’s gone outside the state legal system to hire David Botsford to represent him. He’s also paying him with state money.

There’s the rub, according to Deshotel.

Let’s get the answer.

Uncategorized

Texas AG candidates misrepresent their role

Texas has a long history of tough-talking macho men running for state attorney general.

They make all kinds of vows: to crack down on border security, to be tough on crime, to fight the federal government.

That’s all fine, except that the office requires little of what they individuals are trying to sell.

This year’s Republican primary for attorney general is no different. It’s getting tiresome, to be honest, listening to these individuals try out to out-tough each other.

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2014/02/republican-candidates-for-texas-ag-prepare-for-dash-to-finish-line.html/

The attorney general essentially is the state’s in-house lawyer. He or she represents the state primarily in civil matters. Crime-fighting? They leave that job to the district attorneys elected to serve the state’s 254 counties.

The closest the AG comes to fighting crime is chasing down dead-beat parents who are delinquent on their child-support payments.

Barry Smitherman touts his experience as a prosecutor; Ken Paxton boasts that he has tea party U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz’s support; Dan Branch declares his devotion to the sanctity of human life. They’re all spending a lot of money to promote themselves.

None of it matters as much as how well they’ll perform as a civil litigator representing Texas.

Sigh.

My favorite attorney general candidate of all time, though, was the late Democrat Jim Mattox, who used to brag about how tough he was crime and how he loved a good political battle.

The late great liberal newspaper columnist Molly Ivins once said of Mattox that if he spotted an ice cream stand and a crowd of folks fighting on opposites sides of a street, he’d go for the fight.

Did that make him a good attorney general? No. It did make for a good punch line.

Mattox’s political descendants — who represent the other party — nonetheless are following his lead in their quest for the office he once held.

Uncategorized

TV ad wars begin in Texas election ’14

The television ad wars have commenced in the heated races — on the Republican ballot at least — for some of Texas’s key statewide offices.

Dan Branch is running for Texas attorney general. His main foe is Railroad Commission Chairman Barry Smitherman. Both men are talking like prosecutorial tough guys.

http://www.danbranch.com/

Branch’s TV ad, which I saw early today, is quite fascinating.

The Dallas-area legislator says Texans need someone in the AG’s office who’ll “fight Obama.” OK, how’s that supposed to help the state? I guess he’s joined the GOP amen chorus in proclaiming that President Obama is picking on Texas, is trying to exert federal authority over the state which — they contend — he doesn’t deserve.

The camera pans across a “Don’t Mess with Texas” bumper sticker, further perverting the slogan’s actual intent. You remember that, right? The slogan became popular when then-Land Commissioner Garry Mauro — a Democrat, by the way — started a statewide anti-littering campaign in the 1980s. Don’t mess with the state means don’t throw trash out of your car onto our highways. Since then, though, the slogan has come to mean something quite different to many people. It has become a statement about Texas machismo, our tougher-than-you-are mantra.

What utter hooey.

These AG candidates need to focus more on how they intend to make constructive improvements in the office. Previous attorneys general, Democrat and Republican, used to make child support enforcement their mantra. My time in Texas dates back to the days of Democrat Jim Mattox. Others who followed him in that office, such as Democrat Dan Morales and Republican John Cornyn all have sought to make improvements in some of the duties unique to the office.

The current AG, Greg Abbott, has become lawsuit-happy in his effort to keep the feds at arm’s length. I guess Dan Branch is running as Greg Abbott 2.0.

To me, this continuing combativeness against the hated federal government is a small-minded turn-off.

Uncategorized

Hold the crime-fighter ads, AG candidates

I’ll be waiting during the next few months for someone running for Texas attorney general to pop off one of those “tough on crime” spots.

Then I will be mortified.

The Texas Tribune has an interesting story about three leading Republicans running for the GOP nomination for state attorney general. The guy who’s in the job now, Greg Abbott, is giving it up to run for Texas governor.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/12/01/primary-race-attorney-general-slowly-taking-shape/

The three leading Republicans are Barry Smitherman, who is now serving on the Railroad Commission; Dan Branch, a state representative from Dallas and Ken Paxton, another state rep, from nearby McKinney. They all brand themselves as conservatives — although it’s not yet clear whether they’ll brand each other that way.

What happens occasionally in races for this office is that someone misconstrues — either deliberately or by mistake — what this office is all about.

The AG is the state’s top lawyer. The attorney general represents the state in litigation. His or her office argues for the state in court. The AG, in effect, is a civil litigator.

Every now and then, though, you see an attorney general or someone who wants the job stepping way out of bounds.

Exhibit A has to be the late Jim Mattox, a fiery Democrat who was AG in the 1980s. In 1989, Mattox decided to create a ghastly photo opportunity when the body of a University of Texas student was found in a grave in Matamoros, Mexico. In 1989, Mattox trudged through the mud at the death scene, declaring something to the effect that he would bring whoever committed the crime to justice.

It made for great pictures, except that it was irrelevant. The attorney general’s office would have next to zero influence in determining the outcome of that heinous act.

Of course, that was the year before Mattox launched an unsuccessful run for the Democratic nomination for Texas governor, a race won by then-state Treasurer Ann Richards.

Judges do the same thing all the time. They say they’re “tough on crime,” “tough on criminals.” I always thought judges are supposed to be totally without bias for or against either side. They’re supposed to be neutral when they try cases, aren’t they?

Whatever. I still will be waiting for some attorney general candidate along the way in this election cycle to make some kind of grand declaration about what he’ll do to fight crime.

I hope these fellows prove me wrong.

Uncategorized

Now it’s Smitherman standing up for gun owners

Barry Smitherman is the latest Texas politicians to state the obvious.

He’s all for the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the one that guarantees Americans the right to own firearms.

My reaction to that? Duh!

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/11/20/smitherman-focuses-second-amendment-new-web-ad/

Smitherman, a Republican, currently serves on the three-member Texas Railroad Commission, the agency that regulates the oil and natural gas industry in Texas. He wants to become the state’s next attorney general. Smitherman’s web ad proclaims his undying support for the Second Amendment.

Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, another Republican, recently posted a web ad that says the same thing as he seeks to become the state’s lieutenant governor.

I’m trying to look for the courage it took Smitherman to declare his support for gun owners. Texas isn’t a lot of other states. Gun ownership is virtually a given here. Our state’s popular culture practically requires people to own guns. Texas was among the first states to enact a concealed handgun carry law.

Barry Smitherman is a sophisticated individual. He stands a very good chance of being elected attorney general.

He cannot go wrong by declaring he supports Texans’ right to own guns. Put another way, Smitherman has exhibited a profound command of the obvious.