Grumet: Paxton made Texans fear for their privacy, while keeping his personal life secret

How interesting. Ken Paxton wanted to keep his private life private.

If only he extended that courtesy to other Texans.

We learned this past week that our attorney general, a man who touts his “proven conservative courage,” used an account under the name “Dave P” when taking Uber rides to visit his alleged mistress, according to documents filed for Paxton’s upcoming impeachment trial.

I know: Covering up an extramarital affair is no crime, and it’s the least of the malfeasance described in nearly 4,000 pages of evidence that House impeachment managers filed Thursday night. Paxton is accused of blatantly misusing his office to rush to the aid of now-indicted real estate investor Nate Paul — and getting a posh kitchen remodel in return.

Paxton’s attorney, Tony Buzbee, has countered there’s no proof of bribery, denouncing the investigation as “nothing but a sham.”

Texans deserve a full airing of these serious corruption charges in next month’s impeachment trial. But it’s also worth talking about the ugly double standard of “Dave P.”

Our state’s top law enforcement officer felt entitled to use an online alias to cover his digital tracks, to keep a piece of his private life under wraps. Yet a good number of Texans live in fear of his office snooping into the most personal aspects of their lives.

Paxton didn’t even wait for Texas' ban on gender-affirming medical care for minors to go into effect before he launched investigations in May into the programs at Dell Children’s Medical Center in Austin and Texas Children’s Hospital in Houston, demanding access to a breathtaking array of records. Some panicked parents took legal action to protect their kids’ sensitive medical files, knowing that disclosure could bring Child Protective Services workers to their door — despite the fact that every major medical association supports access to such care.

Nor should we forget the time Paxton’s office asked the Department of Public Safety to provide a list of everyone who had changed their gender on their state ID over the past two years. Thankfully, the DPS didn’t have the technological ability to create such a roster. But transgender Texans were rightly terrified.

These Texans hadn’t committed any crime. And unlike “Dave P,” they were being honest about who they are.

Consider also the untold number of Texans who deleted the period-tracking apps from their phones after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade, amid the unnerving realization that the state government could easily obtain that data on their menstrual cycles.

Others have shared stories of nervously booting up private internet browsers to seek information about ending an ill-fated pregnancy, and then making sure not to text anyone about their plans to receive lifesaving care out of state.

And just three weeks after Paxton was sidelined by impeachment, the Texas attorney general’s office joined 18 other states to oppose a new federal rule that would protect patient records related to reproductive health care. Texas and the other states argued that to “enforce their laws,” they might need to obtain the records for medical care that a patient received out of state — notably, at a place where such care remains legal. This would apply to abortion as well as gender-affirming care.

Perhaps you’re thinking: Well, Texans shouldn’t leave the state to do something that isn’t legal here.

Great. Let me know when prosecutors start going after Texans who play the slots in Las Vegas (hmmm, “Dave P’s” Uber records show a December 2019 excursion to Sin City). Are Texans prohibited from toking up when visiting the other half of the U.S. that allows recreational use of marijuana? (The attorney general’s office didn’t respond to any of my questions.)

Paxton’s Uber alias symbolizes a larger problem: The state of Texas reserves the right to rummage through your private life, while our attorney general keeps all kinds of information secret. And that goes beyond his alleged affair.

Recall that last year, Paxton refused to release his communications while he was in Washington, D.C., for the pro-Trump rally that presaged the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection. Surely Texans deserve to know what our attorney general was doing that day. But Paxton stonewalled in what the Travis County district attorney called a violation of the state’s open records laws.

At the same time, the devastated families of Uvalde are still waiting for DPS records — and really, answers and accountability — from last year’s school shooting at Robb Elementary. But Paxton’s office, which also handles appeals over public records requests, has sided with the DPS in withholding much of that information.

Indeed, an American-Statesman analysis found that Paxton’s office last year rejected 80% of the appeals in which people sought DPS records, up from half of the requests denied earlier in Paxton’s tenure.

Paxton’s impeachment has brought many distressing details to light. His fake username on Uber might seem like the least of it.

But behind “Dave P” stands a real man whose office has the power to examine your personal life while Paxton hides his. That, too, is an abuse of power worthy of Texans’ outrage.

Grumet is the Statesman’s Metro columnist. Her column, ATX in Context, contains her opinions. Share yours via email at bgrumet@statesman.com or via Twitter at @bgrumet. Find her previous work at statesman.com/news/columns.

This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Grumet: AG Ken Paxton keeps own life hidden while prying into yours