Impeach Ken Paxton? Texas Republican who voted to acquit says Senate needs to reconsider

Four months after voting to acquit embattled Attorney General Ken Paxton of the 20 charges the Texas House levied against the state's top lawyer, including bribery and abuse of office, Sen. Drew Springer is calling for another impeachment trial, accusing Paxton and his legal team of possibly misleading the Senate during his September trial.

Paxton's impeachment last year was spurred by a yearslong whistleblower suit that the attorney general sought to end last week with a motion in Travis County state District Court saying he will accept the final judgement and "elects not to contest any issue of fact in this case, as to the claim or damages."

Springer, R-Muenster, who previously announced that he is retiring from the Senate, said in a letter to Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and his colleagues in the upper chamber, that Paxton's most recent legal arguments in attempting to settle the wrongful termination lawsuit point to his possible guilt and warrant the upper chamber's continued attention.

Paxton "cannot admit guilt while claiming innocence," Springer said in a post on X on Thursday that included his letter. "I urge the Lt. Gov & my Senate colleagues to consider reopening Paxton's impeachment. Paxton has not only admitted to violating the articles of impeachment, but he is exposing Texas taxpayers to a settlement of WELL OVER $3.3M. Texans deserve the truth!"

After Paxton and the whistleblowers — four former top aides in the attorney general's office who say they were fired after complaining to the FBI of Paxton's possible criminal behavior in helping a friend and campaign donor — reached a $3.3 million settlement early last year that later fell apart after House members declined to pay for it and instead opened an investigation into the whistleblowers' allegations.

The House on May 27 overwhelmingly voted to impeach Paxton, and the Senate in September cleared him of wrongdoing after holding an impeachment trial. Paxton was acquitted largely along party lines with only Republican Sens. Kelly Hancock, R-North Richland Hills, and Robert Nichols, R-Jacksonville, joining Democrats in voting to permanently remove Paxton from office on certain charges.

After the impeachment trial, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that the whistleblower case could move forward, and Paxton has unsuccessfully tried multiple times to have the case thrown out and his deposition blocked.

All of those motions have been denied in Travis County state District Court. The 3rd Court of Appeals and Texas Supreme Court also rejected Paxton's motions.

"While AG Paxton claims this decision is not an admission of guilt, the fact of the matter is it is an admission of guilt," Springer wrote in his letter. "He can't accept the whistleblower's claims against him while touting that he's innocent against those very claims."

Springer also said that Paxton's effort to seek a financial settlement essentially creates a blank check for the whistleblowers "all in an attempt to avoid his own actions from being exposed."

More: Judge again rejects AG Ken Paxton's motion to block his deposition in whistleblower case

"At this stage, and the point of this letter, I am asking the Senate whether there is a legal mechanism to reopen the impeachment proceedings," Springer wrote. "Failure to at least consider this possibility runs the risk of AG Paxton making a mockery of the Texas Senate."

Later on Thursday, Sen. Sarah Eckhardt, D-Austin, echoed Springer's concern, equating Paxton's legal maneuvers to end the lawsuit to evidence worthy of further examination by the upper chamber.

"I agree with my colleague that AG Paxton’s recent admissions in the whistleblower suit are also admissions to one or more of the articles of impeachment," Eckhardt posted on X. "I support the Senate reopening the impeachment proceedings in light of this substantial new evidence."

Paxton's office did not immediately respond Thursday to an American-Statesman request for comment.

On Wednesday afternoon, District Judge Jan Soifer rejected Paxton's latest requests to vacate the previous ruling compelling his deposition in the whistleblower case and to schedule an emergency hearing on the issue.

In a statement responding to the ruling Wednesday evening, Paxton chastised Soifer's decision as being purely political and decried that the depositions "must proceed even after all facts were conceded and the defendant withdrew its opposition to the case."

Paxton, who has maintained his innocence while not publicly commenting on the allegations against him, is scheduled to be deposed in Austin on Feb. 1.

Patrick, who leads the Senate and presided over Paxton's impeachment trial, wasted no time after the Senate cleared the attorney general in September in criticizing the House for forwarding the impeachment charges to trial. From the seat from where he sat as judge, Patrick, reading from prepared remarks immediately after the trial's end, painted the impeachment proceeding as a political sham.

Patrick did not immediately respond Thursday to an American-Statesman request for comment.

Paxton "should not be allowed to enter into a judgment at taxpayers' expense to make this matter go away for his own personal and political benefit," Springer said in his letter. "AG Paxton has spent more time fighting the deposition than it would have taken him to answer questions truthfully."

This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Impeach Ken Paxton? Texas Republican says Senate needs to reconsider