Politics

Why is it so easy to hate Ken Paxton?

We all had a neighbor like Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. Let her rottweiler run into your garden and blame your two-year-old daughter if she bites her. Call the police at his son’s birthday party on Saturday afternoon, set off fireworks for three days on the 4th of July weekend, urinate on his porch, and charge defamation if you file your own complaint.

As law enforcement officer for the second most populous state, Paxton desperately tries to be the guy who makes life miserable for the entire nation. He has sued the federal government for calling for an end to the “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals” program, trying to block contamination of waterways by coal mines, calling for an end to President Biden’s moratorium on deportation, trying Biden’s order to cancel the cornerstone. He overruled the pipeline called for the government moratorium on new oil and gas leases on public land to be lifted and even tried to prevent Biden from forming a federal “advisory group” to assess the social costs of pollution. “By mid-April this year,” CNN reported this week, “Paxton had already filed eight lawsuits against the Democratic president. He’s on his way to breaking his Barack Obama record, which his wife once made melodious.” who throws guns and my husband is suing Obama. “

In short, Paxton is the guy who unites his neighbors in the common hope of getting what he gets. Usually these hopes are dashed.

This time, however, there is a chance that the prayers will be answered. Paxton has already been publicly trampled by the courts; He now faces state and federal corruption investigations, lawsuits in Texas for alleged violations of legal ethics, and (perhaps worst of all) now reeks of political vulnerability.

Paxton’s record as what I would like to call an “attorney” for lack of a better term is clearly mixed. Last year, Paxton’s two high-profile lawsuits went awry. In November, he asked the Supreme Court to invalidate the entire Affordable Care Act on the grounds that he used to have an individual mandate, but not anymore. In January, he went directly to the Supreme Court to ask justices to install Donald Trump for a second term.

In both cases, Roberts Court fired him for the same reasons: Paxton and Texas, the justices wrote, have no “right to sue.” Standing is what I mean, “What the hell does that have to do with you?” call. Beginning. To go to federal court, a party has to do more than come up with a theory about why someone else broke the law; the party must show that it was particularly violated by the violation of the law. What if the fence is one inch too high? Does it block your view, shade your garden, or harm you at all? Unlike what happens in politics, in federal courts it is not enough to hate your neighbor; He must also suffer a “specific and particular” injury.

Particularization hasn’t been doing so well for Paxton lately. His attempt to overturn the election was based on the claim that state governments in four Biden-sponsored states did not obey their state constitutions and laws when conducting their presidential elections; in other words, the equivalent of pulling a lawn chair to leave roots on one side or the other in a neighbor’s marital dispute. This new theory took a beating: “Texas has shown no legally recognizable interest in the way another state conducts its elections,” the court wrote in a short order with legal terms meaning: “Come back, Huss.”

The Obamacare challenge was then released because Paxton had also not claimed there were no significant injuries.

To understand why, start with the central theme of the only serious challenge facing the ACA, the National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius. As enacted, the ACA required all taxpayers to maintain some type of minimum family health insurance, be it employer-provided insurance, an individual policy, or coverage through a government program such as Medicare or Medicaid. Failure to maintain coverage could result in a reduction in the taxpayer’s income tax refund. This, a legion of law professors and serious bums

Back to top button