Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

Paxton still holding on to bogus voter purge data

It’s all about secrecy. He doesn’t want you to know what he’s up to.

Best mugshot ever

More than a month after a legal settlement was reached to scrap the review, Paxton’s office has indicated it is keeping open the criminal investigation file it initiated based on the secretary of state’s referral. That’s even after the list was discredited when state officials realized they had mistakenly included 25,000 people who were naturalized citizens and admitted that many more could have been caught up in the review.

Paxton’s office made that indication in a letter this week denying The Texas Tribune’s request for a copy of the list of flagged voters.

The Tribune originally requested the list soon after Whitley announced the review. But the attorney general — whose office also serves as the arbiter of disputes over public records — decided that the list could remain secret under an exemption to Texas public information law that allows a state agency to withhold records if releasing them “would interfere with the detection, investigation, or prosecution of crime.” The office separately confirmed that it had opened a “law enforcement investigation file.”

Following the settlement in late April — and after the secretary of state’s office rescinded the advisory that launched the review — the Tribune re-upped its request with both the secretary of state and the attorney general’s office. But the secretary of state’s office in late May and the attorney general’s office this week asserted they would still withhold the list based on the law enforcement exemption.

“As the law, facts, and circumstances on which that ruling was based have not changed, we will continue to rely on that ruling and withhold the information at issue,” Lauren Downey, an assistant attorney general, told the Tribune in an email.

[…]

“It’s very troubling that the attorney general would base an investigation on a debunked list that we know contains tens of thousands of naturalized citizens,” said Nina Perales, vice president of litigation of the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, which sued the state on behalf of several naturalized citizens. “If the only basis of the investigation is that voters are naturalized U.S. citizens, then that’s discriminatory and unconstitutional.”

See here for the background. Lord only knows what there might be to investigate, since the list in question was based on useless data, but that sort of trivia doesn’t stop Ken Paxton. Is there some kind of legal action people could take to force Paxton to fish or cut bait? If there is, I hope they pursue it. If not, I guess we just have to wait.

Related Posts:

4 Comments

  1. Bill Daniels says:

    “It’s very troubling that the attorney general would base an investigation on a debunked list….”

    Funny, no on has had any poblems using a debunked dossier to base a 3 year witch hunt on.

    Hey, folks, if no on on that list is illegally registered to vote, or has illegally voted, you should WANT them to be investigated? They themselves should want to be investigated, for voting violations, and everything else that may arise from the investigation, as is the custom.

  2. voter_worker says:

    If I walk by a fruit stand and there’s a basket of apples with a sign that says “Oranges $.25ea/$5dozen” am I going to stop and have a conversation with the vendor?

  3. Joel says:

    “Is there some kind of legal action people could take to force Paxton to fish or cut bait?”

    i believe it is called criminal prosecution. what is the hold up on that, anyway?

  4. Bill Daniels says:

    I want to know where I can buy oranges for $ .25 each. I’d do more than have a conversation, I’d buy some oranges!