Not So Past

So…

A) Ken Paxton initiated settlement discussions in the civil suit by former Texas AG employees that lead to his impeachment (this fact is actually a bone of contention now).

B) Pursuant to those discussions the case was abated by the Texas Supreme Court.

C) Since the settlement is dead, because the House can’t take up the issue of funding it until the next regular session in 2025, if at all, the plaintiffs want the case to go forward.

D) That kind of delay, by the way, is fine with Paxton:

A spokesperson for Paxton’s office did not immediately return a message seeking comment. Earlier this year, Paxton’s office argued against making the lawsuit active again since a settlement was on the table, telling the court that approval of the settlement could take more than one legislative session.

E)  Paxton is taking that line because returning the suit to active status:

...would allow [the plaintiffs] to do what the House impeachment managers could not — including examining financial documents and putting Paxton, Paul, Paxton’s girlfriend Laura Olson and Paxton’s wife, state Sen. Angela Paxton under oath.

Will the Supreme Court go along with Paxton’s argument? It seems pretty clear the House response of impeachment rather than funding is “not only’No,’ but ‘HELL NO!’” And while legislatures do change after every election, I don’t know of a legal doctrine that says you get another bite at the apple (or several more) on that basis. Legislative acts are presumptively binding on subsequent legislatures. It would be an extreme injustice to tell plaintiffs whose suit has been authorized that they have to wait until a legislative session finally approves a settlement previous sessions have refused to authorize. Not only is there no such doctrine, but how many sessions do you make them sit through before you finally take “No” for an answer?

Paxton thinks he’s invisible and bulletproof; but I think plaintiffs get their day in court; and that includes a lot of discovery and evidence the Senate impeachment trial never heard. Even if it means Laura Olson taking the 5th in public.

As William Faulkner said, the past isn’t over. It isn’t even past. Much as Paxton might wish it to be so he can run for Cornyn’s seat and leave all this far behind.