Ken Paxton impeachment trial vote: Texas attorney general acquitted

AUSTIN, Texas - Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton was acquitted Saturday during his historic impeachment trial.

Paxton has been reinstated to his duties after being suspended from office in May when the GOP-controlled Texas House voted 121-23 to impeach him on 20 articles that include bribery and abuse of public trust. The Senate did not take up four of the articles.

On Day 10 of the trial, a jury of 30 Texas Senators, most of them Republicans, voted on each of the 16 impeachment articles individually. If Paxton had been convicted of even one of the charges, he would have been removed from office permanently.

Articles of Impeachment votes

Vote on Article 1: Acquitted - Senators vote 14 yeas, 16 nays

Vote on Article 2: Acquitted - Senators vote 14 yeas, 16 nays

Vote on Article 3: Acquitted - Senators vote 14 yeas, 16 nays

Vote on Article 4: Acquitted - Senators vote 2 yeas, 28 nays

Vote on Article 5: Acquitted - Senators vote 13 yeas, 17 nays

Vote on Article 6: Acquitted - Senators vote 14 yeas, 16 nays

Vote on Article 7: Acquitted - Senators vote 14 yeas, 16 nays

Vote on Article 8: Acquitted - Senators vote 8 yeas, 22 nays

Vote on Article 9: Acquitted - Senators vote 12 yeas, 18 nays

Vote on Article 10: Acquitted - Senators vote 14 yeas, 16 nays

Vote on Article 15: Acquitted - Senators vote 14 yeas, 16 nays

Vote on Article 16: Acquitted - Senators vote 14 yeas, 16 nays

Vote on Article 17: Acquitted - Senators vote 14 yeas, 16 nays

Vote on Article 18: Acquitted - Senators vote 14 yeas, 16 nays

Vote on Article 19: Acquitted - Senators vote 14 yeas, 16 nays

Vote on Article 20: Acquitted - Senators vote 14 yeas, 16 nays

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick

At the end of the Ken Paxton Impeachment trial, Lt Gov. Dan Patrick commented on the trial, the procedures and chastised the House for voting for the articles of impeachment.

How did the voting process work?

A two-thirds majority – or 21 votes – was required to convict Paxton on any of one of the 16 articles of impeachment that accused him of bribery, corruption and unfitness for office.

Each article of impeachment got a separate vote. Republicans hold a 19-12 majority in the Senate, meaning that if all Democrats voted to convict Paxton, they would need nine Republicans to join them.

State Sen. Angela Paxton, the attorney general's wife, was not allowed to vote. All but two of the other 18 Republican senators consistently voted to acquit Paxton on the charges.

None of the charges got more than 14 votes toward conviction.

Texas Reps. Andrew Murr and Ann Johnson on Ken Paxton acquittal

Texas Reps. Andrew Murr and Ann Johnson, House impeachment managers, speak after Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton was acquitted in his impeachment trial.

What were the 16 Articles of Impeachment against Ken Paxton?

Most of the impeachment articles dealt with Paxton using his office to benefit a wealthy donor, Nate Paul, prompting eight of the attorney general’s top deputies to report him to the FBI in 2020.

The Senate did not take up four of the articles. Three of those date back to Paxton’s pending 2015 felony securities fraud case, including lying to state investigators. The other is related to Paxton’s ethics filings in the impeachment trial.

DISREGARD OF OFFICIAL DUTY

ARTICLE 1 - Protection of charitable organization

Paxton was accused of failing to act as a public protector of charitable organizations by directing his employees in the attorney general’s office to intervene in a lawsuit brought by the Roy F. & JoAnn Cole Mitte Foundation against entities controlled by Paul, harming the Austin charity in an effort to benefit the wealthy donor.

ARTICLE 2 - Abuse of the opinion process

Paxton was accused of misusing his official power to issue written legal opinions. He allegedly had employees prepare an opinion that protected some of Paul’s properties from being sold in foreclosure. Paxton concealed his actions by asking a Senate committee chairperson to seek that opinion. He was also accused of directing employees to reverse their legal conclusion to help Paul.

ARTICLE 3 - Abuse of the open records process

Paxton was accused of misusing his official power by allegedly interfering with his office’s handling of a public records request dealing with the files of a criminal investigation into Paul.

ARTICLE 4 - Misuse of official information

Paxton was accused of misusing his power to administer public information law by improperly obtaining previously undisclosed information held by the attorney general’s office to benefit Paul.

DISREGARD OF OFFICIAL DUTY

ARTICLE 5 - Engagement of Cammack

Paxton was accused of misusing official powers by hiring attorney Brandon Cammack to investigate a baseless complaint made by Paul. That led to Cammack issuing more than 30 grand jury subpoenas in an effort to help Paul.

ARTICLE 6 - Termination of whistleblowers

Paxton was accused of violating the state’s whistleblower law by retaliating against employees who reported his alleged unlawful acts to law enforcement, terminating them without good cause or due process. He’s also accused of engaging in a public and private campaign to impugn those employees’ professional reputations or prejudice their future employment.

MISAPPLICATION OF PUBLIC RESOURCES

ARTICLE 7 - Whistleblower investigation and report

Paxton was accused of misusing public resources by directing employees to conduct a sham investigation into terminated employees’ whistleblower complaints and publish a report containing false or misleading statements in Paxton’s defense.

DISREGARD OF OFFICIAL DUTY

ARTICLE 8 - Settlement Agreement

Paxton was accused of misusing his official powers by concealing his wrongful acts in connection with the whistleblower’s complaints by entering into a settlement with the whistleblowers that provides for payment from public funds. The settlement halted the wrongful termination suit and delayed the discovery of facts and testimony at trial, to Paxton’s advantage. That allegedly prevented voters from making an informed decision about his reelection in 2022.

CONSTITUTIONAL BRIBERY

ARTICLE 9 - Paul’s employment of a woman with whom Paxton has acknowledged having an affair

It was alleged that Paxton benefited from Paul’s decision to hire the woman. In exchange, it was alleged, Paul received favorable legal assistance from, or specialized access to, the attorney general’s office.

ARTICLE 10 - Paul’s providing renovations to Paxton home

It was alleged that in exchange for providing the renovations, Paul received favorable legal assistance from, or specialized access to, the attorney general’s office.

ARTICLE 15 - FALSE STATEMENT IN OFFICIAL RECORDS

It was alleged that Paxton made or caused to be made multiple false or misleading statements in the lengthy written report issued by his office in response to whistleblower allegations.

ARTICLE 16 - CONSPIRACY AND ATTEMPTED CONSPIRACY

Paxton was accused of conspiring or attempting to conspire with others to commit acts described in one or more articles.

ARTICLE 17 - MISAPPROPRIATION OF PUBLIC RESOURCES

Paxton was accused of misusing his official powers by causing employees to perform services for his benefit and the benefit of others.

ARTICLE 18 - DERELICTION OF DUTY

Paxton was accused of violating the Texas Constitution, his oaths of office, statutes and public policy against public officials acting contrary to the public interest by engaging in acts described in one or more articles.

ARTICLE 19 - UNFITNESS FOR OFFICE

Paxton was accused of engaging in misconduct, private or public, of such character as to indicate his unfitness for office, as shown by the acts described in one or more articles.

ARTICLE 20 - ABUSE OF PUBLIC TRUST

Paxton was accused of using, misusing or failing to use official powers to subvert the lawful operation of the state government and obstruct the fair and impartial administration of justice, bringing the attorney general’s office into scandal and eroding public confidence in state government, as shown by the acts described in one or more articles.