Texas State Bar seeks to dismiss its lawsuit against Ken Paxton for challenging 2020 presidential election

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

---

The State Bar of Texas on Wednesday moved to drop its lawsuit against Attorney General Ken Paxton for his attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, extending a cascade of legal and political wins for the once-embattled Republican leader.

In a court filing, lawyers with the bar’s Commission for Lawyer Discipline asked the Texas Supreme Court to dismiss the suit, citing the high court’s December decision to toss a separate state bar lawsuit against Paxton’s top aide, Brent Webster, for working with Paxton to challenge the 2020 outcome in battleground states won by Democrat Joe Biden.

The state bar had sought to sanction Paxton, which could have carried a punishment ranging from a private reprimand to disbarment. Lawyers from the bar — which regulates law licenses in Texas — have argued that Paxton, in falsely claiming to have uncovered major evidence of election wrongdoing, forced the battleground states “to expend time, money, and resources to respond to the misrepresentations and false statements.”

The bar’s dismissal motion effectively ends a case that dates back to May 2022. It is Paxton’s second personal legal victory within the last year: In March, prosecutors dropped long-running felony securities fraud charges against Paxton under an agreement that required the attorney general to perform 100 hours of community service and take 15 hours of legal ethics courses. Paxton also agreed to pay around $271,000 in restitution to those he was accused of defrauding more than a decade ago when he allegedly solicited investors in a McKinney technology company without disclosing that the firm was paying him to promote its stock.

Months before the securities fraud case was resolved, Paxton also survived a series of impeachment charges centered on allegations by former top deputies that he accepted bribes and abused the authority of his office to help a wealthy friend and campaign donor.

And while Paxton has remained under federal investigation for the same corruption allegations that formed the basis of his impeachment, that investigation is now in the hands of a Justice Department run by the administration of Paxton’s stalwart political ally, President Donald Trump. The newly inaugurated president has nominated one of Paxton’s former top aides, Aaron Reitz, to head the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Policy.

In an election case that prompted the state bar lawsuits, Paxton and Webster sought to contest Biden’s wins in four critical states: Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. The case revolved around unsubstantiated claims that those states made illegal pandemic-related changes to election procedures, allegedly casting the results into question.

The state bar suit against Paxton was sparked by public complaints from several lawyers and political activists who contended that Paxton had brought a frivolous lawsuit in bad faith and, in doing so, violated state disciplinary rules for attorneys.

In its decision to dismiss the lawsuit against Webster last month, the Texas Supreme Court upheld an earlier ruling by a Williamson County district judge who said that taking Webster’s law license would violate the Texas Constitution’s separation of powers doctrine. In their motion to drop Paxton’s case, state bar lawyers acknowledged that their lawsuit against the attorney general “raises identical separation of powers issues” as those at issue in Webster’s case.

Disclosure: State Bar of Texas has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.