Ken Paxton cannot be impeached in whistleblower case, says the court

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers updated on top Texas news.

Attorney General Ken Paxton will not have to sit for a deposition in a long-running lawsuit filed by four former senior aides who said he wrongfully fired them after they reported him to the FBI, the Texas Supreme Court ruled Friday.

It’s a victory for Paxton, who has managed to avoid testifying on charges of corruption, bribery and abuse of office despite this civil lawsuit, an impeachment trial and a federal criminal investigation. It is also a blow to the whistleblowers, who have sought to question Paxton under oath for years.

“Ken Paxton is offering to hold his own client, the people of Texas, with an unfettered discretion,” said Tom Nesbitt, who represents former Deputy Attorney General Blake Brickman. “He’s doing it for one reason, to avoid having to testify about his own personal corruption. It’s an act so brazen it could only have sprung from the mind of Ken Paxton, and today the Supreme Court approved it.”

In a statement, Paxton’s office called the ruling a “major victory” against “wasteful, politically motivated litigation.”

The whistleblowers sought to question Paxton and three of his current top deputies under oath: First Assistant Brent Webster, Chief of Staff Lesley French and Senior Counsel Michelle Smith. But the Supreme Court overturned a court order that scheduled those removals.

The judges said that since the attorney general’s office has agreed not to contest the lawsuit, which alleges Paxton violated the state’s whistleblower law, their sworn testimony is unnecessary.

“While we agree with the former employees that the OAG’s admissions do not preclude all discovery, we agree with the OAG that the trial court abused its discretion in ordering the deposition of these four witnesses without considering that the only factual issue , to which these witnesses are likely to provide information — the OAG’s liability under the Whistleblower Act — is now undisputed,” the statement said.

The decision was unanimous, although Judge Evan Young did not participate.

The four whistleblowers — Brickman, Mark Penley, David Maxwell and Ryan Vassar — ​​were among a group of senior advisers who reported Paxton to the FBI in September 2020, concerned about what they saw as his increasingly bizarre and inappropriate behavior with a friend and Austin real . real estate investor named Nate Paul. In the days and weeks after their encounter with federal agents, which they reported to Paxton, the attorney general fired them.

The current status of the federal criminal investigation is unknown, but court documents from the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals show that in June, Justice Department lawyers sought to secure testimony from witnesses in a grand jury investigation involving Paxton.

Whistleblowers sued Paxton in November 2020, alleging their firings were illegal under state law. Paxton disagreed, but offered to settle the case and pay the whistleblowers $3.3 million. To fund that settlement, however, Paxton needs an appropriation from the Legislature.

When he asked the Texas House in 2023 for the money, lawmakers wanted him to publicly answer questions about why Texas taxpayers should foot the bill. The House Ethics Committee began investigating him.

In May of that year, the Texas House impeached Paxton on corruption and bribery charges based heavily on the testimony of whistleblowers. They alleged that Paxton abused his office to favor Paul, including by hiring an outside attorney to investigate allegations made by Paul, providing confidential law enforcement documents to Paul, intervening in a lawsuit involving a charity and two of Paul’s companies and issue a statement from Paul’s lawyers. used to delay foreclosures of several properties.

In turn, House investigators alleged that Paul paid for renovations at an Austin home owned by Paxton and his wife and also employed a woman with whom Paxton had an extramarital affair.

After a two-week high-profile trial, the Texas Senate acquitted Paxton of 16 charges and dismissed the remaining four.

However, the whistleblower case remains. Paxton said in January that he would no longer challenge the facts of the case — despite the whistleblowers’ claims being similar to those his lawyers had vigorously contested during the impeachment trial.

Paxton said he was eager to end the “wasteful litigation” and would “not allow my office to be distracted by these disgruntled former employees and their self-serving sideshow.” He said the settlement should not be seen as an admission of guilt.