Texas State Senator Calls for Reopening Impeachment Case Against Attorney General Ken Paxton
In a noteworthy move, Republican State Senator Drew Springer of Texas is advocating for a reassessment of the impeachment case against the state’s Attorney General, Ken Paxton. Springer is urging a second look at the charges following Paxton’s decision not to challenge allegations made in a whistleblower lawsuit. Springer contends that Paxton’s stance of not admitting guilt while claiming innocence necessitates a thorough review.
Expressing his views on X, Springer called upon the Lieutenant Governor and Senate colleagues to reconsider Paxton’s impeachment. He emphasized Paxton’s admission of violating impeachment articles and the potential financial burden on Texas taxpayers, exceeding $3.3 million, as grounds for further investigation. Paxton was acquitted in September on charges of corruption and unfitness for office, stemming from accusations that he misused his political power to aid real estate developer Nate Paul. The allegations were brought forth in a lawsuit by four former employees who reported Paxton to the FBI.
The whistleblowers—Blake Brickman, Ryan Vassar, Mark Penley, and David Maxwell—claimed wrongful termination for reporting Paxton’s actions. Although Springer initially supported Paxton’s acquittal on 16 impeachment charges, recent developments, including Paxton’s decision not to contest the whistleblower lawsuit, have prompted Springer to question whether Paxton and his legal team provided accurate information to the Senate.
Last week, the Office of the Attorney General filed a court document, asserting its ability to secure a favorable verdict but opting to settle the lawsuit to prevent the political exploitation of the state’s courts. Springer’s focal point for reopening the impeachment case is Paxton’s statement in the filing, choosing not to contest any factual issue and disclaiming guilt. Springer argues that Paxton’s decision, despite denying guilt, effectively amounts to an admission, warranting a legislative reevaluation. The Office of the Attorney General has yet to respond to inquiries about Springer’s position.
