Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Texas
Related: About this forumWhy It's So Easy to Hate Ken Paxton
Link to tweet
In short, Paxton is the guy who unites his neighbors in a shared hope that he will get whats coming to him. Usually, those hopes are disappointed.
Theres some chance this time, however, that prayers will be answered. Paxton has already been kicked around publicly by the courts; now he is facing state and federal corruption probes, Texas Bar proceedings for alleged legal-ethics violations, and (perhaps worst of all) he has now begun to reek of political vulnerability.
Paxtons record as a what I will call, for lack of a better term, lawyer is distinctly mixed. In the past year, Paxtons two highest-profile lawsuits turned out badly for him. In November, he asked the Supreme Court to invalidate the entire Affordable Care Act on the grounds that it used to have an individual mandate but doesnt anymore. In January, he went directly to the Supreme Court to ask the Justices to install Donald Trump for a second term.
In both cases, the Roberts Court sent him packing under the same rationalePaxton and Texas, the Justices wrote, lack standing to sue. Standing is what I call the what the hell business is it of yours? principle. In order to get into federal court, a party has to do more than come up with a theory about why someone else has broken the law; the party has to show that the violation of law hurt him or her in particular. So what if the fence is an inch too high? Does it cut off your view, or shade your garden, or do anything at all to you? Unlike in politics, in federal courts hating your neighbor isnt good enough; you must also suffer a concrete and particularized injury.
Particularization hasnt gone so well for Paxton lately. His attempt to overturn the election was based on a claim that the state governments in four states carried by Biden had not followed their state constitutions and laws in conducting their presidential electionsthe equivalent, in other words, of dragging up a lawn chair to root for one side or another in a neighbors marital spat. This novel theory was met with a cold shoulder: Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections, the court wrote in a brief order, using legal terms that mean, Go back inside, hoss.
Theres some chance this time, however, that prayers will be answered. Paxton has already been kicked around publicly by the courts; now he is facing state and federal corruption probes, Texas Bar proceedings for alleged legal-ethics violations, and (perhaps worst of all) he has now begun to reek of political vulnerability.
Paxtons record as a what I will call, for lack of a better term, lawyer is distinctly mixed. In the past year, Paxtons two highest-profile lawsuits turned out badly for him. In November, he asked the Supreme Court to invalidate the entire Affordable Care Act on the grounds that it used to have an individual mandate but doesnt anymore. In January, he went directly to the Supreme Court to ask the Justices to install Donald Trump for a second term.
In both cases, the Roberts Court sent him packing under the same rationalePaxton and Texas, the Justices wrote, lack standing to sue. Standing is what I call the what the hell business is it of yours? principle. In order to get into federal court, a party has to do more than come up with a theory about why someone else has broken the law; the party has to show that the violation of law hurt him or her in particular. So what if the fence is an inch too high? Does it cut off your view, or shade your garden, or do anything at all to you? Unlike in politics, in federal courts hating your neighbor isnt good enough; you must also suffer a concrete and particularized injury.
Particularization hasnt gone so well for Paxton lately. His attempt to overturn the election was based on a claim that the state governments in four states carried by Biden had not followed their state constitutions and laws in conducting their presidential electionsthe equivalent, in other words, of dragging up a lawn chair to root for one side or another in a neighbors marital spat. This novel theory was met with a cold shoulder: Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections, the court wrote in a brief order, using legal terms that mean, Go back inside, hoss.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 740 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (6)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why It's So Easy to Hate Ken Paxton (Original Post)
LetMyPeopleVote
Jul 2021
OP
elleng
(130,714 posts)1. Something about Texas???
Javaman
(62,497 posts)2. paxton is a smarmy sociopath.
and he's not "probably a crook" he's a fucking felon that has yet to serve a day in prison because of the "good old boy" network here in texas.
if they are ever get thrown out of their fascist power block, the crap that will be found will be on scale that would make the orange asshole blush.
Paladin
(28,243 posts)3. What's to like? (nt)
LetMyPeopleVote
(144,890 posts)4. Ken has the lowest approval rating of all Texas republicans
Link to tweet
Paxton had the lowest approval rating of statewide elected leaders polled with 33% of Texan voters approving and 36% disapproving. 58% of Republicans approve of the job he's doing, while 66% of Democrats disapprove and 59% strongly disapprove.
Patrick had a 36% total approval rating, and a 37% disapproval rating.
Blank pointed out that many state officials remain unknown in the eyes of Texan voters, but that is becoming less and less the case.
I think it's notable that over half of Democrats now register a negative opinion in fact a strongly negative opinion of him, Blank said of Paxton.
Patrick had a 36% total approval rating, and a 37% disapproval rating.
Blank pointed out that many state officials remain unknown in the eyes of Texan voters, but that is becoming less and less the case.
I think it's notable that over half of Democrats now register a negative opinion in fact a strongly negative opinion of him, Blank said of Paxton.