Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton won鈥檛 be required to appear in federal court after reports surfaced Monday that he ran away from a man trying to serve him a subpoena.
Paxton reportedly fled from a process server who was trying to serve the attorney general an order to appear in person in an Austin courtroom Tuesday. The case was brought against the state of Texas by nonprofit groups who raise funds to help people pay for abortions.
A man named Ernesto Martin Herrera said in a sworn affidavit that he attempted to serve Paxton the legal paperwork at Paxton鈥檚 home on Monday. Herrera said Paxton first waited inside his home, then eventually left hurriedly in a vehicle driven by his wife, state Sen. Angela Paxton. The news was first by The Texas Tribune Monday evening.
鈥淚 saw Mr. Paxton ran from the door inside the garage towards the rear door behind the driver side. I approached the truck, and loudly called him by his name and stated that I had court documents for him. Mr. Paxton ignored me and kept heading for the truck,鈥� the affidavit states.
A statement from Paxton鈥檚 campaign account on Tuesday said the judge in the case granted a motion to quash the subpoena and a separate pleading to seal the affidavit from Herrera, despite the latter already being made public.
Paxton also said in the statement that the process server, who the attorney general called a 鈥渟trange man鈥� who 鈥測elled unintelligibly and charged toward鈥� Paxton, was lucky the situation didn鈥檛 escalate. Paxton also made a reference to the Second Amendment in the .
鈥淚n light of the constant threats against me, for which dangerous individuals are currently incarcerated, I take a number of common sense precautions for me and my family鈥檚 safety when I am at home,鈥� he said. 鈥淭exans do the same to protect themselves from threats, and many also exercise their Second Amendment rights to protect themselves and their families.鈥�
The lawsuit in Travis County Tuesday comes after Fund Texas Choice 鈥� a non-profit organization that facilitates Texans鈥� travel to abortion clinics 鈥� and other organizations sued Texas after the state legislature passed its so-called that bans most abortions. The law went into effect following the U.S. Supreme Court鈥檚 ruling overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. The high court鈥檚 ruling returned the question of access to abortion to the states. Jane鈥檚 Due Process, the Lilith Fund for Reproductive Equity, Clinic Access Support Network and others are also plaintiffs in the case.
In a statement to 四虎影院, Fund Texas Choice executive director Anna Rupani said the lawsuit was about protecting a Texan鈥檚 ability to 鈥渇reely travel to attain the healthcare they so deserve.鈥�
鈥淭his lawsuit will help determine whether or not Texas has extra territorial jurisdiction outside its borders,鈥� Rupani said. 鈥淲e know it shouldn鈥檛, so we are fighting to give Texans the comfort and support they deserve from their home state. There is safety and comfort in Texans helping other Texans.鈥�
四虎影院's Bekah Morr contributed to this report.
四虎影院 is made possible through the generosity of our members. If you find this reporting valuable, consider making a tax-deductible gift today. Thank you.
Got a tip? Email Juli谩n Aguilar at jaguilar@kera.org.You can follow Juli谩n on Twitter @nachoaguilar.
