The State Bar of Texas has accused Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton of making false claims of fraud in a lawsuit aimed at overturning the 2020 presidential election. A three-judge panel of the 5th District Court of Appeals ruled that Paxton can face discipline from the bar association as the lawsuit targeted him in his personal capacity as an attorney rather than as a public official. Despite the lone dissent from Judge Emily Miskel, the majority opinion led by Judge Erin Nowell, an elected Democrat, allowed for potential sanctions against Paxton. A similar lawsuit was also brought against one of Paxton’s top deputies, and a coalition of state Republican attorneys general urged the Texas Supreme Court to reject the bar’s efforts to discipline Paxton.
Paxton’s spokeswoman, Paige Willey, expressed confidence in appealing the ruling to the Texas Supreme Court, stating that she believes the court will not allow false claims by the State Bar and partisan political revenge to impact the professional licensure of the state’s lawyers. The State Bar of Texas and the committee accusing Paxton declined to comment on the ruling. The disciplinary process for attorneys facing such accusations can range from a written admonition to a suspension or disbarment, resembling a trial with both sides presenting testimony and obtaining evidence through discovery. Despite the threat of sanctions, Paxton is not required to be a member of the state bar to serve as attorney general.
State bar officials began investigating complaints against Paxton over his election lawsuit in 2021, and a similar disciplinary proceeding was also initiated against Paxton’s top deputy. The outcome of the case involving Paxton’s deputy is pending a ruling by the Texas Supreme Court. Paxton is among the highest-profile attorneys facing consequences for his involvement in efforts led by former President Donald Trump to challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election. The ruling by the appeals court allows for potential disciplinary action against Paxton for his role in the controversial lawsuit, which sought to question President Joe Biden’s victory. Despite the disagreement among the judges on the panel, the majority’s decision opens the door for further scrutiny of Paxton’s actions in the legal proceedings.
