Transparency in government is at the heart of accountability, and is especially important when a prominent elected official is accused of influence peddling….
Transparency in government is at the heart of accountability, and is especially important when a prominent elected official is accused of influence peddling.
This brings us to the latest disquieting development in Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s legal woes, specifically ongoing settlement talks between attorneys for Paxton and three of four whistleblowers who have accused the attorney general of influence peddling and retaliation. Lawyers for the fourth whistleblower opposed the motion and urged the court to move forward toward trial.
Ideally, this case would stay in the public eye. Influence peddling is one of the worst allegations that can be made against a public official because it asserts serious and intentional violations of the public trust and oath of office. The cadre of people who were among Paxton’s closest aides left the AG’s office and filed a whistleblower complaint that alleged he was personally interfering in a federal investigation to benefit an Austin real estate developer and donor. Paxton has rejected calls for his resignation, repeatedly denied wrongdoing and claimed that the allegations, which sparked an FBI investigation, were politically motivated.
A settlement could block public airing of the allegations in open court. In all likelihood, any settlement agreement would include a clause that would keep all of the details secret. What a disaster that would be for the truth.
To add insult to injury, Texas taxpayers would foot the legal bill. Dallas Morning News journalists in Austin reported last year that private law firms have charged the state more than half a million dollars to defend Paxton against lawsuits that question his actions as a lawyer and a boss. Now, they might have to pay the career conservative attorneys who left their jobs because the stink of Paxton’s service was too much to bear.
First elected in 2014, Paxton has been under indictment on an unrelated securities fraud case since fall 2015. He has yet to face a jury. Last year, the Texas State Bar sued him for professional misconduct for misrepresenting that he had uncovered new evidence to challenge the 2020 presidential elections results in four battleground states.
A person accused of wrongdoing has a legal right to settle a case without a trial. And the same right applies to those who have brought the complaints.
But we urge the whistleblowers who brought this complaint to strongly consider carrying forward. There is no question that will come at personal cost. They have already acted against their financial and career interests in putting personal integrity first. They deserve our thanks for that. But the public interest is now at stake. This case needs the daylight that a trial, depositions and testimony can bring.
The allegations that led to the whistleblower complaint are serious. They go to the heart of honest governance. The people of Texas need the daylight this case could bring.
We welcome your thoughts in a letter to the editor. See the guidelines and submit your letter here.