A panel of statewide appeals court justices will soon decide whether Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton can 鈥� at least temporarily 鈥� enforce case reporting rules on attorneys for the state鈥檚 larger, mostly Democratic counties including Dallas.
A group of nine district and county attorneys sued Paxton鈥檚 office in May challenging new reporting requirements imposed on their offices that they say are unauthorized, unconstitutional and would drain department resources.
The 15th Court of Appeals heard arguments last week after the attorney general appealed a Travis County judge鈥檚 to temporarily block Paxton鈥檚 office from enforcing the rules.
Paxton, who is a Republican, adopted a new rule in March requiring district and county attorneys with populations of 400,000 or more to 鈥渟ubmit initial, quarterly, and annual reports relating to criminal matters and the interests of the state.鈥� That applies to about a dozen counties in the state, including some that are more red.
The rules also require district and county attorneys to report information on indictments against police officers and poll workers, how cases are resolved and internal communications about how prosecutors make decisions.
Failure to comply with the new rules could be treated as 鈥渙fficial misconduct鈥� and lead to the forfeiture of the elected attorney鈥檚 office. Paxton that the rules are meant to rein in 鈥渞ogue鈥� district attorneys and push them to more vigorously prosecute crimes.
Paxton鈥檚 comments echo Republicans鈥� general criticisms of Democratic prosecutors and judges, often blaming Democrats for crime in urban counties. The attorney general has been particularly critical of district and county attorneys for not pursuing election law violations to his standards, and he now has the power to prosecute those crimes himself.
Critics have accused the AG鈥檚 office of imposing the rules for political reasons, seeking to influence how the elected attorneys handle cases.
Arguments in the case hinge on whether a statute in the Texas Government Code gives Paxton the implied or expressed authority to make these rules.
Justices are also considering whether it violates the Texas Constitution鈥檚 separation of powers doctrine for the attorney general 鈥� part of the executive branch 鈥� to impose rules on district and county attorneys, which are in the judicial branch.
William Cole, principal deputy solicitor general with the AG's office, said the law gives Paxton both the implied and explicit authority to enforce the new rules, bringing order and predictability to what he said is a mostly case-by-case reporting process. The AG鈥檚 rules would be just as much of a lift as the state鈥檚 public information laws, Cole said, which require government agencies to submit case files to the AG to weigh whether the information they contain can be withheld from the public.
鈥淲e're operating in this case not pursuant to some sort of ethereal power, executive branch power to compel information, but pursuant to a statute the Legislature passed and recodified in 1985,鈥� Cole said. 鈥淚 don't think there's a separation of powers clause problem here on that point, with the mere fact of us taking advantage of the tools the Legislature has given us.鈥�
Chief Justice Scott Brister questioned where it would end if the AG鈥檚 office continually amended the rules to rein in district attorneys with whom it disagreed.
But he also wondered whether the new rules are a fair response to elected attorneys like Dallas County District Attorney John Creuzot declining to prosecute minor marijuana-related charges.
鈥淚 am worried about an overreaction 鈥� some people would say it would be a normal reaction 鈥� to the fact that some prosecutors, as a policy, will not enforce some criminal laws. Just won't. Do you disagree with that?鈥� Brister asked attorney Bradley Snead, representing the district and county attorneys.
Snead didn鈥檛 take any position on that. But he returned to the elected attorneys' argument that the rules would impose a substantial burden, with Dallas County claiming the requirements would cost the county more than $22 million over the next five years.
鈥淭his regulatory scheme, as we discussed, is causing real harm and invasive oversight, causing district and county attorneys to hand over case files and victim information,鈥� Snead said. 鈥淚f the legislature had intended for this single sentence to be a capacious grant of rulemaking authority, it would have done so.鈥�
Toluwani Osibamowo is 四虎影院鈥檚 law and justice reporter. Got a tip? Email Toluwani at tosibamowo@kera.org.
四虎影院 is made possible through the generosity of our members. If you find this reporting valuable, consider . Thank you.
