AUSTIN, Texas — Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has issued a warning to the City of Austin, threatening legal action over a recently passed city council resolution designed to protect transgender children seeking gender-affirming care. The new city policy states that no city personnel, funds, or resources can be used to investigate or prosecute transgender individuals or anyone seeking gender-affirming care.
Austin City Council member Mackenzie Kelly was the only vote against the resolution, which prevents city police and prosecutors from enforcing a Texas state law that bans transgender children from accessing puberty blockers, hormone treatment, and surgeries. Kelly expressed concerns about the legal ramifications, stating, “I caution the community who was even in favor of this item to set their expectations correctly for what we even legally can do in this situation. In that regard, I feel like that was a performative resolution.”
Attorney General Paxton, however, was quick to respond. He said that if Austin “refuses to follow the law and protect children,” his office would “consider every possible response to ensure compliance.” Paxton’s remarks underscored the state’s authority over local municipalities, suggesting that Texas cities do not have the freedom to choose which state laws to follow.
Brian Smith, a political science professor at St. Edward’s University, likened the state-city relationship to that of a parent and child, pointing out that the state has considerable power in enforcing laws across municipalities. The Texas Regulatory Consistency Act, signed into law last May, prohibits cities from adopting rules that violate state or federal law. Additionally, a recent state law seeks to hold “rogue prosecutors” accountable. According to Smith, “If the prosecutors or the district attorney in the City of Austin decide he’s not going to prosecute these, there are ways that you can have them removed.”
Representative Brian Harrison, a Republican from Waxahachie, supported the state’s firm stance. He said he would back a bill making council members personally liable for costs associated with gender-affirming care or, in a more extreme scenario, advocate for state control over the city council. “You can still have some type of a ‘local governance,’ but the materiality, the main features, the actual control of the major things that matter in the city, I think, need to be debated and discussed to be turned back over to the state legislature,” said Harrison.
LGBTQ+ advocates have criticized the Republican response as contradictory to Texas’s tradition of local control. Miriam Laeky from Equality Texas described the GOP’s approach as “really alarming,” considering that Texas was founded on local governance.
Despite potential political repercussions, Council Member Zo Qadri voted in favor of the resolution, stating that Austin aims to be a haven for the transgender community. “We refuse to govern with fear. It’s sad and disappointing that the attorney general would rather pick fights on this issue than stand up for people he’s sworn to protect,” Qadri said.
While the resolution is set to take effect next week, there’s still a possibility that the Austin City Manager could halt its implementation. The situation continues to develop, with both sides bracing for a legal showdown.
