AUSTIN (KXAN) — The county and district attorneys of Travis and El Paso counties filed a lawsuit Friday against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and his office (OAG) over rules introduced in 2024 that require them to send sensitive case records to his office.
“The challenged rules exceed Defendants’ authority for rulemaking and invade privacy rights of third parties without statutory justification while at the same time requiring prosecutors to disclose information they are statutorily required to keep confidential,” the lawsuit states.
KXAN reached out to Paxton and the OAG and will update this story when we receive his response. When we previously reported about the rule, Paxton said in a press release that it would “ensure accountability and promote public safety.”
“In many major counties, the people responsible for safeguarding millions of Texans have instead endangered lives by refusing to prosecute criminals and allowing violent offenders to terrorize law-abiding Texans. This rule will enable citizens to hold rogue DAs accountable,” he said.
The rule, Texas Administrative Code Chapter 56, applies to counties with more than 400,000 residents and would allow the OAG to initiate the dismissal of an attorney found not in compliance.
It requires those counties to send “entire case files,” including:
- privileged communications;
- private personal information about law enforcement officers, crime victims, arrestees, criminal defendants, and witnesses;
- protected information such as grand jury testimony and materials, medical, mental health, and substance abuse disorders and treatments;
- sexually explicit images of both adults and children;
- juvenile records; and,
- law enforcement investigation materials obtained by prosecutors to prosecute crimes.
“Even if Defendants had the authority to impose the Challenged Rules, the rules are so vague that Plaintiffs cannot determine what statistical information and case files must be transmitted—and the purported consequence is possible removal from office,” the lawsuit reads.
The plaintiffs asked the court to issue a temporary injunction against the rule during the case, and ultimately a permanent injunction.
The full lawsuit can be read below:
Read: Read More