DALLAS (AP) — For years, the powers and protections that come with being Texas’ top lawyer have helped Ken Paxton fend off ethics complaints, criminal charges and an FBI investigation.
With the Texas Senate’s Saturday
vote to acquit Paxton of corruption charges at his impeachment trial the Republican has once again demonstrated his rare political resilience. And he retains the shield of the attorney general’s office in legal battles still to come.[...]
[...]Back in office, Paxton nonetheless still faces serious risk on three fronts: an ongoing
federal investigation into the same allegations that led to his impeachment; a
disciplinary proceeding over his effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election; and felony
securities fraud charges dating to 2015. Here’s what to know about each:
THE FEDERAL INVESTIGATION Paxton came under
FBI investigation in 2020 when eight of his top deputies reported him for allegedly breaking the law to help a wealthy donor, Austin real estate developer Nate Paul.[...]
[...]In 2015, Paxton was indicted on charges of defrauding investors in a Dallas-area tech startup by not disclosing he was being paid by the company, called
Servergy, to recruit them. He faces five to 99 years in prison if convicted and has pleaded not guilty.
The indictments were handed up just months after Paxton was sworn in as attorney general. He won a second and
third terms despite them.
Paxton’s trial has been
delayed by legal debate over whether it should be heard in the Dallas area or Houston, changes in which judge would handle it, and a protracted battle over how much the special prosecutors should get paid.[...]
[...]Also on hold during Paxton’s impeachment trial was an ethics case brought by the state bar.
In 2020,
Paxton asked the U.S. Supreme Court to, effectively, overturn then-President Donald Trump’s electoral defeat by Joe Biden based on bogus claims of fraud.
The high court threw out the request.
Afterward, the State Bar of Texas received a series of complaints alleging that Paxton and a deputy had committed professional misconduct with the suit. The bar didn’t initially take up the complaints but later launched an
investigation.
Last year, the bar sued seeking unspecified discipline for Paxton and his
second-in-command, alleging they were “dishonest” with the Supreme Court.[...]