TEXAS — A Texas appeals court says Attorney General Ken Paxton can face discipline for the 2020 election case.

The State Bar of Texas can move forward with its ethics complaint, in which Paxton is accused of dishonesty when he sued four swing states to contest their administration of the election.  

Charlie Silver was one of the lawyers who supported the decision to file an ethics complaint against Paxton. After the 2020 election, the State Bar of Texas’ Commission for Lawyer Discipline filed a disciplinary action against Paxton claiming he violated its rules by engaging in “conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.” 

“A historical Republican talking point. They’re argued for tort reform for decades on the ground that plaintiff’s attorneys filed frivolous lawsuits, and that’s a terrible thing. Well, filing a frivolous lawsuit isn’t any less terrible when a Republican does it,” said Silver. 

Last Friday, a Dallas-based appeals court ruled 2-1 that because the complaint is against Paxton’s’ capacity as a lawyer and not as attorney general, “subjecting Paxton to disciplinary proceedings does not violate separation of powers; immunizing him does.”

The dissenting judge wrote that “The attorney general’s primary duties are to render legal advice in opinions to various political agencies and to represent the state in civil litigation.” 

If Paxton is found to have committed professional misconduct, the consequences vary from suspension from practice to disbarment. 

“There are also other lesser punishments. They could require him to do continuing legal education in a particular area. They could impose a financial penalty on it,” said Silver. “They could require him to apologize.” 

Paxton’s office did not respond to Capital Tonight’s’ request for comment on the ruling.

His latest comment on the case came days before the decision when 18 Republican attorneys general submitted a brief arguing for dismissal.

Paxton said the state bar is “weaponizing politically motivated lawfare to intimidate elected leaders and their staff from upholding the Constitution when it inconveniences their political agenda.”

“To deal with allegations that you have misrepresented something, he would have to show that what he said was true,” said Suzanne Westerheim, a Texas legal ethics expert. 

The state bar filed a similar complaint against First Assistant Attorney General Brent Webster in a separate district court. The court ruled against Webster, and he appealed to the Texas Supreme Court. Experts expect Paxton’s legal team to do the same.