As November approaches, the spotlight is on Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and his campaign to prosecute voter fraud. Three crucial elections for the Court of Criminal Appeals could significantly impact his ability to pursue these cases.
Why These Elections Matter
The upcoming elections are not your typical judicial contests; they have transformed into high-stakes battles that could redefine the legal landscape for voter fraud prosecution in Texas.
The Context of the Court of Criminal Appeals
The Court of Criminal Appeals serves as the highest authority for criminal matters in Texas. With nine Republican justices currently in place, it’s a powerful body, particularly in deciding cases related to the death penalty and significant criminal appeals.
Key Background
In December 2021, the court ruled 8-1 that a state law empowering Paxton’s office to prosecute voter fraud cases violated the separation of powers doctrine in the Texas Constitution. This decision restricted Paxton’s authority, requiring district attorneys to refer cases before his office could take action.
Paxton’s response was swift and vocal. He referred to the ruling as “ludicrous” and has since rallied support for three Republican challengers—Lee Finley, Gina Parker, and David Schenck—who oppose the decision.
The Candidates
-
Lee Finley: A Marine Corps veteran and seasoned criminal lawyer with over 20 years of experience. He believes the ruling undermines core Republican values and has branded it “judicial activism.”
-
Gina Parker: A former city and county prosecutor turned private practice attorney. Parker felt inspired to run after the court’s election fraud ruling, claiming it dilutes voters’ voices.
-
David Schenck: A commercial litigation attorney with previous experience as a justice on the Dallas-based 5th Court of Appeals. Schenck has been critical of the ruling but refrains from committing to how he would handle similar cases if elected.
These candidates are up against Democrats Chika Anyiam, Nancy Mulder, and Holly Taylor in the elections set for November 5. Historically, no Democrat has won statewide office in Texas for nearly three decades.
The Stakes: A Shifting Judicial Landscape
If Finley, Parker, and Schenck win, it could pave the way for Paxton to regain the authority he lost. Although their wins alone wouldn’t secure a majority, they represent a significant shift that could influence future rulings on voter fraud.
Concerns About Potential Outcomes
Election law experts like Joshua Sellers warn that if the court were to overrule its own precedent, it could open the door for politically motivated prosecutions. This concern is particularly relevant given Paxton’s track record. According to an analysis by the American Civil Liberties Union, a staggering 72% of those prosecuted for voter fraud under Paxton’s office have been Black or Latino.
A Divided Court: Looking Ahead
While the current elections are crucial, other justices who supported the 2021 ruling, David Newell and Bert Richardson, will face reelection in 2026. The court reversing its own decision would be an unusual move, but it’s not impossible given the current political climate.
The Bigger Picture
Paxton’s election fraud office has become one of his top priorities, but reports suggest it has been underwhelming in performance despite an increasing budget exceeding $2 million. This raises questions about the effectiveness and motives behind the office’s operations.
Conclusion: What’s Next for Ken Paxton?
As we approach the elections, all eyes will be on the candidates and their potential impact on Ken Paxton’s ability to pursue voter fraud prosecutions. The results could either bolster his campaign or set back his efforts significantly.
With the stakes higher than ever, it’s vital for voters to understand how these elections could shape Texas’s approach to election integrity and the prosecution of voter fraud.
