In a major legal victory for Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office, the Texas Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that state bar regulators cannot discipline First Assistant Attorney General Brent Webster over his involvement in a controversial 2020 election-related lawsuit. The 7-2 ruling dismissed the State Bar of Texas’ disciplinary case, marking a significant development in the ongoing legal battles tied to the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election.
The ruling from the Texas Supreme Court effectively halts the disciplinary action against Webster and sets a precedent for the related case against Paxton himself, which is also facing efforts to be dismissed. Justice Evan Young, writing the majority opinion, argued that the disciplinary commission’s case amounted to an improper “second-guessing” of legal arguments made by Paxton’s office during its ill-fated attempt to overturn the 2020 election results.
“The commission’s actions would violate constitutional separation-of-powers principles by allowing a judicial body to challenge the claims made by the executive branch,” Justice Young wrote. “To permit this type of collateral attack would jeopardize the independence of the judiciary and risk political interference.”
The disciplinary cases stem from Texas’ high-profile lawsuit, filed in December 2020, that sought to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. Paxton, a staunch ally of former President Donald Trump, was counsel of record for the case, while Webster, his top deputy, appeared in the initial filings. The lawsuit, which sought to invalidate the election results in four battleground states, was swiftly dismissed by the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled that Texas lacked legal standing to pursue the case.
Following this dismissal, the State Bar of Texas’ Commission for Lawyer Discipline filed separate complaints against Paxton and Webster, accusing them of making false statements about election fraud. These actions were part of broader efforts by bar regulators across the country to hold Trump-aligned attorneys accountable for their roles in attempting to overturn the election results.
In 2021, a lower court dismissed the disciplinary case against Webster, but an appeals court in El Paso revived it in 2022, prompting Webster’s appeal to the Texas Supreme Court. With Tuesday’s ruling, the high court’s decision puts an end to the disciplinary action against Webster, though the case against Paxton remains ongoing.
Following the decision, Webster issued a statement celebrating the ruling, calling the State Bar’s disciplinary actions “ridiculous attempts to wage legal warfare” against him and his colleagues. He condemned the efforts as “disgraceful” and insisted that they served as a disservice to the people of Texas.
In a separate statement, Paxton praised the decision, claiming that it had “ended the witch hunt against the leadership of my office.” Paxton, who is also seeking to have the separate case against him dismissed, indicated that the logic behind the court’s ruling could very likely benefit him in his own ongoing legal challenges.
The Texas Supreme Court’s ruling only applies to the case against Webster, but its implications could extend to Paxton’s case as well. The disciplinary case against Paxton, which also involves allegations of false claims about election fraud, continues to move through the court system. However, Paxton’s legal team is optimistic that the high court’s reasoning will apply in his case as well.
Read more: