(The Center Square ) – Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s attorneys filed a motion with the Senate on Wednesday requesting it exclude evidence that they say the House obtained in violation of the Texas and U.S. constitutions and state law.
In a statement citing the motion, lead attorney Tony Buzzbee said, “The House’s sham impeachment of the Attorney General is based on an illegal investigation that ignores the Constitution’s basic concepts of justice and due process. The investigation blatantly violated the Texas Government Code which expressly requires the Committee to place witnesses under oath before obtaining their testimonies.
“Yet in violation of Texas law, the Committee recommended impeachment based on third-party statements (hearsay) that were not taken under oath (hearsay upon hearsay) and subsequently summarized by House investigators (hearsay upon hearsay upon hearsay) to House Members.”
Paxton’s attorneys have so far filed several motions. They include requesting the impeachment articles be quashed; that three Democrats be barred from voting as jurors; that the House provide a bill of particulars because only vague accusations, not charges of crimes, were listed; that 19 articles be dismissed outright; that any evidence of alleged conduct that occurred prior to January 2023 be excluded; and now, that any evidence the House obtained from unsworn witnesses be thrown out.
All impeachment rules and procedures, House motions and Paxton attorney motions have been published on the Senate impeachment website. House managers have said they will reply to motions filed by Paxton’s attorneys by the filing deadline of August 15.
The Senate has yet to issue a statement in response to being sued by Texans who argue two of the Senate rules governing the impeachment trial are unconstitutional. Prior to the rules being announced, on May 26, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick told reporters not to ask any questions about the impeachment trial because he said they couldn’t talk about it. He later issued a gag order on July 17 to all parties involved when it was made public that the House wasn’t complying with Senate rules.
The Senate has also not issued a statement about state senators and representatives who appear to have violated the gag order by tweeting statements related to impeachment after July 17.
In the 12-page motion, Paxton’s attorneys point out that the witnesses who were cited in the House manager’s report, the basis for the impeachment articles, were never put under oath. The investigators who spoke to them and then described their statements to the General Investigating Committee also never testified under oath.
The entire impeachment proceedings were “premised on hearsay upon hearsay upon hearsay, containing flawed assumptions and suppositions,” Paxton’s attorneys argue. And on this basis, the House seeks to overturn the will of more than four million voters. This impeachment should have never been brought. This whole proceeding is contrary to Texas and federal law.”
Because the House did not follow basic due process and Texas law, Paxton’s attorneys argue, the Senate should exclude all “of the illegally obtained evidence that the House may try to offer against the Attorney General.”
The motion explains the Texas Rules of Evidence and how unsworn witness statements violate the Texas and U.S. constitutions, specifically the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. Within the legal framework of the Confrontation Clause, defendants have “a right to confrontation,” to hear witness testimony and be able to cross examine them. This process requires witnesses to be placed under oath.
The House “clearly violated the Texas and federal Confrontation Clauses,” Paxton’s attorneys argue, which GIC Chairman, Rep. Andrew Murr, R-Junction, acknowledged in his statements on May 27 on the House floor that no one was placed under oath as part of GIC’s investigation or hearing.
The House argues it acted like a grand jury and it didn’t need to put anyone under oath. Paxton’s attorneys argue Texas law requires all witness testimony that is given to a grand jury be under oath. Any evidence obtained without doing so is inadmissible.
Unsworn statements also violate state statutory law, which requires all legislative committees to require witnesses to give testimony under oath, they argue.
House managers are still in violation of Senate rules mandating it provide information to Paxton’s attorneys, the motion states. They have only provided nine out of 20 witness statements and are currently “in violation of this Court’s Discovery Order.”
Because the witness statements violate the Texas and U.S. constitutions and Texas law, they argue that any evidence derived from them must be excluded.
This article First appeared in the center square