With flurry of motions, Ken Paxton asks Senate to toss out impeachment charges without trial

Ken Paxton’s lawyers over the weekend waged an aggressive fight to stop the suspended attorney general’s impeachment trial from taking place as scheduled next month, filing a barrage of motions that their counterparts in the Texas House have until next week to formally challenge.

As outlined in the rules the Senate adopted for the Sept. 5 trial, Paxton’s team had until Saturday to file all pretrial motions. From Friday through Saturday, they filed a staggering 13 motions, and they argue that the trial should never happen because the charges are confusing, nonimpeachable or lack evidence. They separately accuse House managers of dumping 180,000 pages of documents on them, leaving Paxton and his lawyers to question which among those records contain evidence prosecutors intend to present at trial.

The flurry of motions underscores Paxton and his attorneys' fight to defeat all 16 impeachment articles he faces without a trial and clear the path for the three-term Republican to return to office as the state’s top attorney. Paxton, who has been suspended since late May, when the House voted overwhelmingly to impeach him, is represented by prominent Houston lawyers Tony Buzbee and Dan Cogdell as well as six lawyers in the attorney general’s office who are on leave to help him prepare his defense.

In the past month, Paxton’s team has filed 20 pretrial motions, including one from earlier last week that seeks to dismiss all but one count because the conduct alleged to have occurred came before Texas voters reelected Paxton in 2022.

The House managers, led by legendary Houston lawyers Dick DeGuerin and Rusty Hardin, have until Aug. 15 to respond to each Paxton motion and, as of Monday, had not responded to any.

Many of the 16 counts Paxton faces are for bribery or misuse of office in connection with his relationship with Nate Paul, an Austin real estate developer and a Paxton campaign donor. Another four counts related to Paxton’s ongoing felony case involving securities fraud charges are being held in abatement, meaning they were separated from the others and won’t be taken up at this trial.

Before opening statements Sept. 5, all motions from Paxton to dismiss a charge will be held to a majority vote among the 30 eligible senators. Paxton’s wife, Sen. Angela Paxton, R-McKinney, will not get to vote, as the Senate’s rules prohibit her from having any meaningful role as a juror due to her familial conflict.

On any remaining charges, the Senate will hear sworn testimony before rendering a verdict. The trial is likely to last two to three weeks, according to Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who will preside over the proceedings in a role similar to a judge. A vote from two-thirds of the Senate, or 21 of the 30 qualified jurors, is needed to permanently remove Paxton from office.

In seeking to dismiss the impeachment articles against Paxton, his lawyers over the weekend made these arguments:

Article 1: Paxton is accused of harming the nonprofit Mitte Foundation by pushing for a settlement in its lawsuit against Paul. Paxton’s lawyers say that the purpose of the settlement was to help the nonprofit avoid legal fees for excessive litigation.

Article 2: In 2020, Paxton issued what the House says was a legal opinion to halt a courthouse foreclosure sale involving Paul’s properties. Paxton's lawyers say the attorney general provided guidance, not a formal opinion, and that it was consistent with Gov. Greg Abbott’s restrictions at the time on public gatherings during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Article 3 and 4: These are related to public information requests. The first says he directed his office to refuse to render a proper decision related to a request for records from the Department of Public Safety. The second says he obtained records held by his office to benefit Paul. In both matters, Paxton’s lawyers say the charges are vague and do not make a clear allegation.

Article 5: This relates to Paxton hiring Houston lawyer Brandon Cammack to investigate law enforcement authorities on behalf of Paul, who had accused the officials of illegally searching his home and business. Paxton’s lawyers say he had the authority to do this, and that the House is mistaken on Cammack’s actual title, which they say was special prosecutor and outside counsel, not attorney pro tem.

Article 6 and 8: Former top aides say Paxton fired them in violation of whistleblower protections after they reported his alleged misconduct involving Paul to the FBI. Paxton’s lawyers say this is not impeachable, and that the matter is for a court of law. Paxton is also accused of concealing his actions by pushing lawmakers to fund a $3.3 million settlement with the whistleblowers. His lawyers say the process was public, and that Paxton concealed nothing.

Articles 7 and 15: On the whistleblower complaint, Paxton is accused of directing his office to conduct a sham investigation and then in the findings of a 400-page report making numerous false or misleading statements. His lawyers say the impeachment notice doesn’t specify what was untrue, and that disputes House managers raised in testimony are “petty” and “trifling.”

Articles 9 and 10: For his assistance to Paul, Paxton is accused of receiving a home remodel funded by Paul and securing employment in Paul’s company for a woman with whom Paxton was having an affair. Paxton’s lawyers reference “missing elements” they say are needed to show there was an actual bribery agreement between Paul and Paxton.

Articles 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20: These broad charges rely on specific claims from earlier impeachment articles. Boiled down, they say Paxton engaged in inappropriate conduct and is unfit to continue in office. Paxton’s lawyers say the five articles are vague and, as such, should be tossed out.

Separately, Paxton’s lawyers filed a motion for summary judgment on the grounds that this is a criminal proceeding and that the House has failed to articulate the actual claims against him. The House lawyers previously said this is not a criminal proceeding and that they expect to say more in a formal response to Paxton’s motions.

This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Texas impeachment: AG Ken Paxton asks Senate to toss out charges