(The Center Square) – Texans have sued Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, the Texas Senate and the Senate Sergeant-at-Arms arguing two Senate rules and a gag order related to the impeachment trial of Attorney General Ken Paxton are unconstitutional.
Houston-based attorney Jared Woodfill filed the lawsuit in Travis County on behalf of Harris County resident Dr. Steven Hotze, Collin County resident Allesan Paige Streeter, Sutton County resident and former Texas House Rep. Molly White, and Harris County resident Sam Malone.
Of the Senate’s rules governing the impeachment trial, two, Rule 10 and Rule 31, are unconstitutional, the lawsuit alleges.
Rule 31 bars Sen. Angela Paxton, R-McKinney, the wife of Paxton, from voting in the trial, which violates Article 15 of the Texas Constitution, which requires state senators to serve in the court of impeachment, according to the lawsuit. The rule also violates Article III Section 22 of the Constitution, the lawsuit alleges, because nearly all the senators have “personal or private interest” in voting in the trial. The clause prohibits any member with a “personal or private interest” in a “measure or bill” from voting.
“Because the Rules Committee met in secret, there is no way to know how the committee arrived at the conclusion that Senator Paxton had a disqualifying conflict of interest,” the plaintiffs argue, and asks if any senators or Patrick disclosed a “personal or private interest” as required by Article 3, § 22.
“Arguably, every senator and the Lieutenant Governor have “personal or private interests,” it states. Sen. Charles Schwertner, R-Georgetown, for example, endorsed George P. Bush in the Republican Primary against Paxton. Bush claimed, “Everyone knows Ken Paxton is corrupt.” By endorsing Bush, Schwertner “has a ‘personal or private interest’ in seeing that General Paxton is convicted,” but wasn’t excluded under Rule 31, the lawsuit states.
Neither was Sen. Mayes Middleton, R-Galveston, who invested in former Congressman Louie Gohmert’s primary campaign against Paxton. Nor were any Democrats, including three whom Paxton’s attorneys have asked to be removed as jurors who’ve all said Paxton is guilty.
The lawsuit also points out that the Senate rules committee “worked in secret for three weeks drafting the proposed rules without telling the public when and where they were meeting. … The committee never gave public notice for its meetings, despite Senate rules requiring committees to provide 24-hour notice for meetings, even if they intend to meet privately in executive session.” The rules were also debated in secret behind closed doors with no public debate, the lawsuit notes.
Despite Patrick claiming the Senate would conduct a fair process, the plaintiffs argue, “The process has been anything but transparent and has excluded Texans from participating and having their voices heard in a proceeding that could result in almost 30 million Texans being disenfranchised from the voting process.”
Prior to the gag order going into effect, former Travis County Judge and state Sen. Sarah Eckhardt, D-Austin, raised concerns about the rules saying they “fall short of fair trial procedures.”
The lawsuit also argues that Rule 10 and the gag order, which prohibit members from discussing the impeachment trial with the public, violate Article 1, Section 8 and Article 1 Section 27 of the Texas Constitution.
Patrick has argued that the rules and gag order were created to ensure Paxton receives a fair trial. He has also instructed the media not to ask him questions about the trial because he will not answer them.
Patrick’s July 17 gag order prohibits “any member of the court; member of the House of Representatives; party to the trial of impeachment; witness in the trial of impeachment; or attorney, employee, or agent of any of these individuals” from making any statements or publishing any information about the trial “that a reasonable person would expect to be disseminated by means of public communication, if the person making the statement knows or reasonably should know that it will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing the trial of impeachment, pose a serious threat to the constitutional guarantees to a fair trial, or impair the court’s ability to maintain a fair and impartial court.”
It also prohibits the attorneys involved from making any statements about the trial. Anyone who violates the order is subject to being held in contempt of court, confined in county jail for up to six months or being fined up to $500.
By prohibiting the plaintiffs and all Texans from communicating with their elected officials about the impeachment trial, Rule 10 and the gag order violate the Texas Constitution’s prohibition on laws “that abridge the freedom of speech or the right of the people to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
“The Senate must make rules consistent with the Texas Constitution, including providing public access, conducting public testimony, debate, and voting,” the lawsuit argues. “Government power cannot be exercised in conflict with the constitution. Texas law does not and cannot empower the Texas Senate to exclude the people from communicating with their duly elected representatives.”
The plaintiffs are asking the court to issue a temporary restraining order and rule that Senate Rules 31 and 10 and the gag order are unconstitutional.
This article First appeared in the center square
