It could be the defining legacy of Rick Perry’s career, depending on how things go in the courts.
This corndog has not been coerced in any way
The coercion law has been used only sparingly in Texas, according to records for the past five years, and some legal experts call it problematic.
Others, however, say its absence will be felt if the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals agrees with the decision to toss the law.
“I see it not just as a numbers game,” said Melissa Hamilton, visiting criminal law scholar at the University of Houston Law Center.
“To the extent you are taking away tools from prosecutors to charge as well as to plea bargain, they are going to be potentially deterred from bringing more cases. And I don’t see how that’s helpful to the citizens,” Hamilton said.
[…]
The state is appealing the 3rd Court’s decision to throw out the coercion law, saying it should stay on the books to hold public officials accountable. Perry still faces a charge of abuse of official capacity, which he is appealing.
Some agree with Perry’s team and the 3rd Court that the coercion law has problems.
“When something that could fit that coercion of a public servant statute would come in, it was almost always a better fit for bribery or for obstruction or retaliation of a public servant,” said Bexar County Assistant District Attorney Patrick Ballantyne, whose job includes handling public integrity cases.
“I think that statute needs to be more narrowly tailored by the Legislature for a lot of the reasons that the 3rd Court cited,” Ballantyne said. “Basically it encompasses too much constitutionally protected speech. Stuff that may just be impassioned criticism of a public servant may technically fall under the letter of that statute. So it’s a statute that’s just too broad a sword given the constitutional issues that are at play.”
The Texas Department of Public Safety criminal history database shows 23 convictions statewide under the coercion law in the past five years. The database is dependent on reporting by local entities.
The number of cases involving public servants such as elected officials or government employees – the category of the law targeted by the 3rd Court decision – is much smaller.
DPS doesn’t capture information on whether those convicted were public officials, according to a spokesman. Ballantyne said of three Bexar County convictions, none were public servants.
[…]
Professor Geary Reamey of St. Mary’s University School of Law said effects of the 3rd Court’s ruling will be minimal, and that lawmakers can move to address problems if need be. The Legislature previously amended the law after an appellate court found constitutional problems.
“I don’t think it’s a terribly big deal. We’ll always have statutes that try to address corruption and malfeasance and misfeasance by public officials,” Reamey said. “It may very well be that the Legislature will decide that they want to come back and address the concerns.”
See here, here, and here for the background. With all due respect to Prof. Reamey, I think the odds of the Legislature acting to clarify or rewrite the existing coercion statue are slightly less than the odds are of Dan Patrick being the grand marshal at next year’s Pride parade. It would be nice if they attempted to fix it, because I do think that what Rick Perry did should fall afoul of a coercion law. It’s not the veto, it’s the threat against another elected official. If what Perry did is okay, then what’s to stop Greg Abbott from threatening to veto every bill John Whitmire authors or sponsors unless he steps down? Again, it is well within the Lege’s capacity to tailor such a law in whatever way they think is best and to aim it at whatever behavior they think should be prohibited, but given that there’s zero incentive for them to do so, and plenty of incentive for them to not do so, I hope the CCA reverses the Third Circuit and leaves the current law standing. Oral arguments are for November 4, so we’ll have some idea soon enough which way they wind is blowing.