Weekly News Round Up Of The State’s Top Law Enforcement Officer – Texas Attorney General
Staff Report
Texas Attorney General, Ken Paxton is the lawyer for the State of Texas and is charged by the Texas Constitution to:
- defend the laws and the Constitution of the State of Texas
- represent the State in litigation
- approve public bond issues
To fulfill these responsibilities, the Office of the Attorney General serves as legal counsel to all boards and agencies of state government, issues legal opinions when requested by the Governor, heads of state agencies and other officials and agencies as provided by Texas statutes.
The Texas AG sits as an ex-officio member of state committees and commissions, and defends challenges to state laws and suits against both state agencies and individual employees of the State.
Many Texans look to the Office of the Attorney General for guidance with disputes and legal issues. The agency receives hundreds of letters, phone calls and visits each week about crime victims’ compensation, child support, abuse in nursing homes, possible consumer fraud and other topics. To find out more about the Texas Attorney General, visit the official website at https://texasattorneygeneral.gov/.
WEEKLY NEWS ROUND-UP OF THE STATE’S
TOP LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER…
THE TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL
AG Paxton Releases Statement on Order Restricting the Secretary of State from Cooperating with Counties to Maintain Voter Rolls
AUSTIN – Attorney General Ken Paxton today released a statement in response to an order from the U.S. District Court of San Antonio that deprives state and county election officials of the capacity to faithfully execute their duties under state and federal law to maintain voting rolls. The Court heard evidence and arguments in this case on February 19, 20 and 25.
“Today’s ruling involves a federal district court improperly assuming control over key aspects of the State’s obligation under federal and state law to maintain the integrity of its voter rolls,” Attorney General Paxton said. “While we appreciate the court’s acknowledgment that the Secretary of State took his actions in good faith, no state official violated any applicable law and there is no need for a federal court takeover of state activities. We are weighing our options to address this ruling and to continue making our case that ineligible voters should not vote and counties are free to continue to follow the law and keep their voter rolls clean.”
The Court recognized that there is “unanimity among the parties, counsel and the Court that non-American citizens are ineligible to vote” and the Court found the Secretary of State’s efforts to identify non-citizen voters were undertaken in good faith.
However, the order today prevents county election officials from directly communicating with individual voters about their citizenship, and prevents those officials from discharging their duty to remove ineligible voters from the voting rolls for any reason without first obtaining the Court’s permission.
The Court also directed the Secretary of State to instruct counties that they may not send notice of examination letters to voters or remove ineligible voters from the rolls without prior Court approval.
While the Court refused to dismiss any of the claims against the State, the Court denied the request for preliminary injunction against the attorney general, correctly finding that it could not enjoin the attorney general for engaging in First Amendment protected speech.
View a copy of the order here.
AG Paxton Releases Statement on Court Decision Upholding Texas’ Electoral College System
AUSTIN – Attorney General Ken Paxton today issued the following statement after a U.S. District Court in San Antonio sided with Texas and dismissed a lawsuit challenging the time-honored Electoral college system used in every presidential election since 1789:
“The Constitution allows states to appoint electors ‘in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.’ Texas chose the winner-take-all method that 47 other states also use, a method that has been in constant use since 1789,” Attorney General Paxton said. “Only an amendment to the Constitution can change or eliminate the stable and successful presidential election system designed by our Founders.”
A federal lawsuit filed last March against Texas sought to end the Electoral College system that awards every electoral vote to the winning presidential candidate in each state. Texas is among 48 states and the District of Columbia that appoint its presidential electors through a statewide winner-take-all system. Nearly 50 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed a decision rejecting the argument that the Electoral College system is unconstitutional.
View the U.S. District Court’s ruling here.
Request For Opinion
REQUEST FOR OPINION: Whether the same individual may serve as city manager and as police chief in a home-rule municipality
READ FULL REQUEST RQ-0275-KP: https://www2.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/opinions/ 51paxton/rq/2019/pdf/RQ0275KP.pdf
RECEIVED: Wednesday, February 20, 2019
REQUESTOR: The Honorable Russell D. Thomason
Eastland County Criminal District Attorney
100 West Main, Suite 204
Eastland, Texas 76448
Request For Opinion
REQUEST FOR OPINION: Whether a groundwater conservation district may define “agricultural crop” as “food or fiber commodities grown for resale of commercial purposes that provide food, clothing, or animal feed” and utilize that definition to determine the applicable fee rate for “irrigating agricultural crops”
READ FULL REQUEST RQ-0274-KP: https://www2.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/opinions/ 51paxton/rq/2019/pdf/RQ0274KP.pdf
RECEIVED: Wednesday, February 20, 2019
REQUESTOR: The Honorable Bob Hall
Chair, Committee on Agriculture
Texas State Senate
Post Office Box 12068
Austin, Texas 78711-2068
AG Paxton: Trump Administration’s Title X Rule is a Victory for Conscience, Human Life, and the Rule of Law
AUSTIN – Today, Attorney General Ken Paxton applauded the issuance of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ final rule revising the regulations governing the Title X family planning program.
Title X is a federal program dedicated to providing family planning services to low-income individuals.
Among other things, the finalized rule will prevent federal taxpayer dollars from subsidizing abortion by prohibiting Title X clinics from referring individuals to abortion.
It also requires a real physical and financial separation between family planning clinics receiving money under the program and abortion clinics.
And it eliminates the previous requirement that recipients of Title X funds provide abortion counseling, protecting the conscience rights of providers who believe in the sanctity of human life.
“The Trump Administration’s final rule simply codifies the obvious: the deadly work of the abortion industry, which destroys innocent and defenseless human life inside the womb, is the very opposite of family planning. Certainly, it should not receive the benefit of federal funding, nor should healthcare providers be forced to encourage women to consider abortion as a family planning method,” Attorney General Ken Paxton said. “Through this rule, the Trump Administration is preserving individual freedoms and upholding human life – including unborn life.”
In a March 2018 letter, Attorney General Paxton encouraged HHS to address these issues, and HHS cited his letter when it proposed the new rule.
Notification Of Opinion
REQUEST FOR OPINION RQ-0245-KP: Whether a commissioners court has a duty to maintain public roads.
OPINION SUMMARY KP-0240: A court would likely conclude that a county has a duty to maintain a road, remove obstacles, and regulate gates only if the road has been laid out as a county road by law and has not been discontinued.
A court would also likely conclude that when a county is not a party to litigation between private landowners, fact findings recited in the judgment rendered in that litigation may affect private rights but do not establish a county duty to maintain a road or remove a gate from the litigated road.
Notification Of Opinion
REQUEST FOR OPINION RQ-0244-KP: Authority of a county to refund penalties and interest paid by taxpayers in certain circumstances
KP-0239 OPINION SUMMARY: Subsections 33.01 l(a)(l), (a)(3), and (d) of the Tax Code permit a taxing unit under some circumstances to waive penalties and interest charged on delinquent taxes based on an act or omission of the taxing unit, or a formerly-correct address for payment, if certain requirements are met and the taxing unit receives a timely submitted written request for the waiver.
To the extent Hood County failed to mail a tax bill despite the County’s possession of the taxpayer’s mailing address, a court could conclude that the taxes are not yet delinquent, in which case the statutory deadline in subsection 33.01 l(d) for submitting the waiver request has not passed.
To the extent Hood County mailed the tax bills in question such that a waiver of penalties and interest under section 33.011 is foreclosed, article III, subsection 52(a) of the Texas Constitution likely precludes the County from reimbursing taxpayers from its general fund for the amount of the penalties and interest.
Notification Of Opinion
REQUEST FOR OPINION RQ-0243-KP: Application of Government Code section 573.062, the nepotism continuous-employment exception, to a tax assessor-collector’s sister-in-law.
KP-0238 – OPINION SUMMARY: Section 573.041 of the Government Code prohibits a public official from employing a person who is related to the public official by the specified degree of consanguinity or affinity. Section 573.062 excepts persons employed in a position for a specified continuous period of time prior to a relative’ s election or appointment to public office.
To the extent the tax office employs the sister-in-law in her current position for one year prior to the appointment of her relative as county tax assessor-collector, the sister-in-law’s service satisfies the requirements under section 573.062 and her continued employment does not violate chapter 573 of the Government Code.
AG Paxton Applauds Gov. Abbott’s Appointment of Brett Busby to the Texas Supreme Court
AUSTIN – Attorney General Ken Paxton today applauded Governor Greg Abbott’s appointment of Brett Busby to the Texas Supreme Court to replace Justice Phil Johnson, who retired at the end of last year. From 2012-2018, Busby served as a justice on the Texas 14th Court of Appeals.
“Brett Busby has an outstanding legal mind and served exceptionally on the Texas 14th Court of Appeals,” Attorney General Paxton said. “He understands that the role of the judiciary is to uphold the law and the Constitution, not legislate from the bench. With this appointment, Busby will continue his distinguished career of service to all Texans and the state’s highest court.”
Busby is an experienced appellate litigator and a former partner at Bracewell & Giuliani LLP in Houston. He received his undergraduate degree from Duke University and his law degree Columbia University School of Law. Following law school, Busby served as a law clerk at the U.S. Supreme Court, and later argued one case and briefed many others in that court. He also handled dozens of appeals in the Texas Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal.
Gov. Abbott appointed Busby to replace Justice Johnson for the rest of his term, which extends through 2020. Busby is the governor’s second appointment to the nine-member Texas Supreme Court.
