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
Texas AG Ken Paxton Sworn in by Governor Greg Abbott for Second Term
AUSTIN – Attorney General Ken Paxton today was officially sworn in to a second term in office as Texas’ chief legal officer. Governor Greg Abbott administered the oath of office during the swearing-in ceremony held at the courtroom of the Texas Supreme Court in Austin.
Attorney General Paxton, who was re-elected last November, was joined at the ceremony by public officials, friends, staff and members of his family – his wife, state Senator Angela Paxton, and four children: Tucker, Abby, Mattie and Katie.
Texas Governor, Greg Abbott swearing in Ken Paxton for his second term as Texas Attorney General.“I am deeply honored to be granted the opportunity to serve the citizens of Texas as their attorney general for a second term,” Attorney General Paxton said. “Protecting Texans, fighting federal overreach, and upholding Texas law and the Constitution remain among my top priorities. I’m blessed and grateful to have an exceptional team of dedicated public servants in my office who are dedicated to serving the people of Texas.”
Attorney General Paxton leads more than 4,000 employees across 38 divisions in 117 offices around Texas.
The agency includes nearly 800 attorneys, who handle more than 30,000 cases annually – enforcing child support orders, protecting Texans against consumer fraud, enforcing open government laws, providing legal advice to state officials, and representing the state in court, among other duties.
Fighting federal overreach, Attorney General Paxton filed 22 lawsuits against the Obama administration during a two-year stretch, of which six cases were heard in the U.S. Supreme Court.
Texas Governor, Greg Abbott and Attorney General Ken Paxton surrounded by family during the swearing in ceremony for his second term as Texas Attorney General.Most recently, a U.S. District Court agreed with his 20-state coalition lawsuit holding Obamacare unconstitutional. Attorney General Paxton obtained an injunction or other winning ruling in over seventy five percent of the cases he has brought against the federal government.
Attorney General Paxton has won major cases for Texas on illegal immigration, school rights, voter ID, sanctuary cities, redistricting, Environmental Protection Agency rules and religious freedom.
Under his leadership, the attorney general’s Child Support Division is recognized as the most successful and cost-effective program in the nation.
And the Human Trafficking and Transnational Organized Crime section, which Attorney General Paxton created in 2016, helped shut down Backpage.com, the largest online sex-trafficking marketplace in the U.S. His office has also obtained a record number of successful election fraud convictions.
Prior to becoming Texas’ 51st attorney general in January 2015, he served as a state Senator and a member of the Texas House of Representatives. A graduate of Baylor University, Attorney General Paxton earned his law degree from the University of Virginia School of Law.
Watch the ceremony
AG Paxton Obtains $1.5 Million in Settlement with Neiman Marcus over Data Breach
AUSTIN – Attorney General Ken Paxton today announced a $1.5 million 43-state settlement with The Neiman Marcus Group LLC, resolving an investigation into a data breach the Dallas-based retailer disclosed in January 2014.
The breach, which affected 65,644 Texans, exposed customer credit card data at 77 Neiman Marcus stores nationwide.
Over a three-month period in 2013, approximately 370,000 Neiman Marcus credit cards were unlawfully accessed by an unknown third party, and at least 9,200 of them were used fraudulently.
“Texas law requires businesses to implement and maintain reasonable safeguards against cyberattacks to protect consumers’ personal information from unlawful use or disclosure,” Attorney General Paxton said. “I urge companies to evaluate whether they have in place a thorough and ongoing written information security program that serves to safeguard their customers’ information.”
Under terms of the settlement, Neiman Marcus will maintain reasonable procedures to protect its customers’ personal information and guard against future attacks by hackers.
The retailer must obtain an information security assessment and report from a qualified third-party professional and detail any corrective actions that it takes.
Attorney General Paxton’s investigation was conducted pursuant to the Texas Identify Theft Enforcement and Protection Act. Texas will receive $95,000 in attorneys’ fees and costs as part of a 43-state settlement with Neiman Marcus.
View a copy of the settlement here: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/admin/2019/Press/NMarcusAVC%201%208%202019.pdf
AG Paxton Defends State Laws Protecting the Health and Safety of Texas Women
AUSTIN – A legal team from Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office today urged the U.S. District Court in Austin to dismiss a baseless lawsuit brought by radical pro-abortion activists seeking to strike down virtually all abortion-related laws and regulations in Texas.
“It’s outrageous that these activists are so dedicated to their radical pro-abortion agenda that they want the courts to repeal laws enacted by the Texas Legislature to protect the health of women getting abortions, such as requiring the sterilization of medical instruments,” Attorney General Paxton said. “Many of Texas’ common-sense abortion regulations have been in place for decades, are similar to laws passed in a majority of the states, and have been upheld as constitutional by the courts.”
During oral arguments at today’s district court hearing, Attorney General Paxton’s office pointed out that the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld requirements like those targeted in the lawsuit against Texas, affirming multiple times that the state has an interest in safeguarding women’s health and protecting unborn life.
Texas’ abortion-related laws include many common-sense rules, such as requiring that abortion clinics are licensed, surgical instruments must be sterilized, and more complicated and dangerous late-term surgical abortions must be performed in surgical centers rather than in a doctor’s office.
Texas is not alone in protecting the health and safety of women:
–40 states limit abortions to being performed only by a physician;
–44 states have parental involvement requirements; and
–29 states have laws requiring physicians to provide certain information to patients considering an abortion.
“My office’s solid legal arguments demonstrated that the lawsuit is attempting to use the judicial system to repeal laws that the state’s elected representatives passed to make sure women who have abortions do so with all the information they need and under conditions that are as medically safe as possible,” Attorney General Paxton said. “I’m hopeful the district court will agree with us and dismiss this baseless lawsuit.”
NOTIFICATION OF OPINION
Original Request for Opinion: Whether a county clerk whose office does not accept electronic documents for recording must accept and record a printed copy of an electronic document under particular circumstances (RQ-0235-KP)
Opinion Summary: KP-0233
The county clerk must accept a paper document presented for recording if the document complies with the requirements of the particular statutory provision authorizing the recording of the document.
To the extent a printed copy of an electronic document presented for recording by the county clerk concerns real or personal property, it must contain an original signature that meets the requirements of subsection 12.00ll(b) of the Property Code to be recorded by a county clerk.
To the extent a county clerk has implemented electronic filing and recording in accordance with state law, the clerk’s obligation to accept a document submitted electronically for recording depends on whether the document (1) is a real property record; (2) is submitted by an authorized filer who has completed the requisite enrollment and agreement with the county clerk; and (3) otherwise meets the requirements for recording of real property records submitted electronically.
NOTIFICATION OF OPINION
Original Request for Opinion: Whether a funeral provider may infer a decedent’s preferred method of disposition from the contents of a prepaid funeral contract (RQ-0234-KP)
Opinion Summary: KP-0232
If a prepaid funeral benefits contract lacks an affirmative election regarding the disposition of the contract beneficiary’s remains, a funeral provider’s inference from the purchases made.
If the contract does not satisfy the statutory requirement for written directions that specify the disposition of the decedent’s remains under subsection 71 l.002(g) of the Health and Safety Code and subsection 154.155l(a)(2) of the Finance Code.
NOTIFICATION OF OPINION
Original Request for Opinion: Issues related to quorums and city council member absences (RQ-0233-KP)
Opinion Summary: KP-0231
To the extent a city council member is required by Rule 1.10(e)(1) of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct to abstain from voting on a matter, the council member could be “required by law to abstain from voting” under the City of Fulshear’s charter. The questions whether the charter language is so construed and whether a council member is bound by Rule 1.10(e)(1) are questions beyond the purview of an attorney general opinion.
Without any requirement from a state statute or a city charter, it is within the discretion of a home-rule city council to determine when to declare a council person absent from its meetings.
NOTIFICATION OF OPINION
Original Request for Opinion: Whether and to what extent the Permanent School Fund should be classified as nonspendable in annual financial reporting (RQ-0231-KP)
Opinion Summary: KP-0229
Article VII, section 5 of the Texas Constitution expressly prohibits the Legislature from enacting a law appropriating any part of the Permanent School Fund except as therein provided. Funds in the state treasury may not be expended without a legislative appropriation.
The Constitution thereby makes the Permanent School Fund nonspendable except for specific distributions and payments authorized by the Constitution, and it should be so classified on annual financial reports.
NOTIFICATION OF OPINION
Original Request for Opinion: Whether a commissioners court may fund certain county departments through revenue generated by a sales and use tax imposed pursuant to chapter 324 of the Tax Code (RQ-0232-KP)
Opinion Summary: KP-0230
If a specific expense of a county’s environmental health, emergency management, mosquito control, or animal services departments relates to the treatment and prevention of physical pain and disease to the public, the county may use funds generated under Tax Code chapter 324 to fund health services provided by the relevant departments.
Whether a county incurs an expense in the accomplishment of a health service under chapter 324 will depend on the specific facts and circumstances concerning the expenditure.
Such factual determinations are questions for the commissioners court to determine in the first instance, subject to judicial review.
NOTIFICATION OF OPINION
Original Request for Opinion: Whether a member of an independent school district board of trustees may simultaneously serve as the county judge (RQ-0230-KP)
Opinion Summary: KP-0228
A person may not serve as Jim Hogg County Judge while simultaneously serving as a member of the board of trustees of the Jim Hogg County Independent School District.
NOTIFICATION OF OPINION
Original Request for Opinion: Whether a state legislator may simultaneously serve as president of a municipal management district operating under chapter 375 of the Local Government Code (confirmation and clarification of Attorney General Opinion GA-0386) (RQ-0229-KP)
Opinion Summary: KP-0227
To the extent the president of a municipal management district is a nontemporary, salaried employee of the district, he or she is prohibited by article XVI, section 40(d) of the Texas constitution from also serving as a state legislator.
Article XVI, section 40(d) does not prohibit an individual who works as an independent contractor from also serving as a state legislator.
The Texas Supreme Court’s right-to-control test to determine whether an individual is an independent contractor is fact intensive, and a mere affirmation or joint statement without factual support is likely insufficient to establish an individual as an independent contractor.
Though generally a state legislator may accept a fee for work performed in a capacity other than as a legislator, provisions in chapter 572 of the Government Code limit a legislator’s private employment. Penal Code chapter 36 contains criminal provisions potentially applicable to a legislator’s private compensation.
A violation of these provisions is determined based on relevant facts and outside the purview of an attorney general opinion.
Instead, the Texas Ethics Commission may issue opinions on ethical questions or bring civil charges for a violation of chapter 572, and local prosecutors may bring any criminal charges warranted by particular circumstances.
NOTIFICATION OF OPINION
Original Request for Opinion: Whether a legislator may receive payment from a unit of local government for lobbying activities (RQ-0228-KP)
Opinion Summary: KP-0226
No statute specifically precludes a legislator from accepting compensation to represent a unit of local government before a state agency or another unit of local government. Article XVI, section 40(d) of the Texas constitution precludes a legislator from providing services as an employee of a unit of local government.
A legislator may not solicit, accept, or agree to accept any benefit from any person unless the legislator gives legitimate consideration in a capacity other than as a public servant.
Whether a payment to a legislator constitutes bonafide consideration for providing representation before a state agency or a unit of local government will depend on the particular facts.
