Paxton Ethics Case Will Continue After Court Finds No Immunity

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton can be punished by the state bar, if the bar proves his effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election results was meritless, a Texas court of appeals ruled late Thursday.

A three-judge panel on the Fifth Court of Appeals in Dallas became the second court to deny Paxton’s request to toss the bar’s administrative action. Paxton (R) had argued that as a member of the executive branch, he’s not like other lawyers whose conduct is subject to state bar discipline.

Rejecting that argument, the panel said, “subjecting Paxton to disciplinary proceedings does not violate separation of powers; immunizing him does.”

As such, the court found it lacked jurisdiction to hear Paxton’s appeal.

The decision allows the case against Paxton to proceed in Collin County, Paxton’s home county, where he opted to file a lawsuit rather than accept a public reprimand from the bar. The bar received four complaints saying Paxton made false representations in pleadings with the US Supreme Court trying to overturn election results in four battleground states. Among them was an assertion from Paxton that Texas had uncovered “substantial evidence” discrediting the election results.

Paxton, a conservative ally of former President Donald Trump, sought to overturn President Joe Biden’s wins in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin. The Supreme Court tossed the case, saying that Texas and Paxton didn’t have standing to bring it but didn’t rule on the merits.

At oral arguments in Paxton’s case in November, the appeals panel appeared divided on whether the bar had jurisdiction over Paxton. Justice Erin Nowell, a Democrat, asked questions favorable to the bar, while Justice Emily Miskel, the court’s lone Republican, made it clear she would likely rule for Paxton. Justice Nancy Kennedy (D) remained mostly silent as the other two justices asked questions, offering no insight into how she was leaning.

In a dissenting opinion, Miskel said she would’ve dismissed the bar’s case with prejudice. She echoed Paxton’s argument that he can’t be disciplined for actions taken in his official capacity.

Paxton’s first assistant, Brent Webster, is also facing possible problems with the state bar for his role in the lawsuit. He prevailed in getting the case against him dismissed at district court. An appeals court in El Paso reinstated a complaint, siding with the bar. Webster in August asked the Supreme Court to review the decision, and the high court hasn’t announced if it will.

Thursday’s ruling comes a day after a panel on the same appeals court ruled Trump ally Sidney Powell can’t be disciplined for trying to invalidate the 2020 election results. The court said the state bar produced no evidence that Powell knowingly asserted false claims.

The case is Paxton v. Comm’n for Law. Discipline, Tex. App., 5th Dist., No. 05-23-00128-CV, 4/18/24.