Paxton urges Texas judge to jail Beto O'Rourke over fundraising related to redistricting fight
'In their zeal I guess to intimidate a political rival, they are actually lying to the court,' said O'Rourke's attorney, Mimi Marziani, who said she would quickly alert the court to the context of O'Rourke's comments and her intention to seek sanctions against Paxton.
Paxton's request to jail a political rival comes amid calls by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, Paxton and their allies to arrest dozens of Democratic state lawmakers who left Texas to prevent Abbott from holding a special session to pass his ultra-partisan redistricting measure — one expected to net Republicans five seats in Congress.
Paxton's motion to hold O'Rourke in contempt accuses him of raising funds to directly cover the expenses and fines of the dozens of Texas Democratic lawmakers who bolted from the state to deprive Republicans a quorum to conduct legislative business. Fahey ruled that such fundraising would violate Texas laws against deceptive practices.
But Marziani emphasized that Fahey's ruling was specific to raising funds that directly bankrolled the state lawmakers' effort, as opposed to general political fundraising. O'Rourke, in court papers, has labeled Paxton's bid to constrain his political activity 'frivolous' and urged Fahey to transfer the case to his home base of El Paso.
'They have no basis for this lawsuit,' Marziani said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
a few seconds ago
- UPI
Judge to hear Trump's immigration suit against all 15 Maryland federal judges
A judge Wednesday will hear the Trump administration's suit against 15 federal judges in Maryland on an immigration procedure. Pictured are protestors in Los Angeles in April. Photo by Jim Ruymen/UPI | License Photo Aug. 13 (UPI) -- A judge Wednesday will consider a lawsuit in which the President Donald Trump administration filed suit against all 15 Maryland federal judges over a deportation order. Chief Judge George Russell on May 21 made a standing order that set rules for cases where immigrants face immediate risk of deportation. The order applies a temporary stay of deportation of a few days while the case is considered. The suit is an escalation of the administration's battle against the judiciary, which has slowed his use of executive power. As the top judge in the district of Maryland, it's part of Russell's job to set procedures for how courts administer cases. The order was in response to the Trump administration's flurry of actions taken to deport people without due process. The most well-known case is that of Salvadoran man Kilmar Abrego Garcia who was wrongly deported from Maryland to a detention center in El Salvador. He was eventually returned. The hearing Wednesday will be in the Baltimore federal courthouse but has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Thomas Cullen, who normally presides in Virginia. Justice Department lawyers under Attorney General Pam Bondi said in court filings that the order "harms the federal government's sovereign interests on a repeated and ongoing basis" because it applies even when the immigrant may have no valid legal argument or the court has no jurisdiction over the case. The Department of Justice argued that the court has no authority to issue the order, which goes far beyond Russell's authority as a chief judge. The judges have hired a legal team that includes Paul Clement, who served as solicitor general under Republican President George W. Bush. The lawyers' attorneys argued in their filings that the lawsuit is "fundamentally incompatible with the separation of powers," which assigns different functions to the president and courts. The standing order is a purely administrative procedure and does not reflect any consideration of the legal merits of any claim, they wrote. Robert Koulish, research professor and director of undergraduate law programs at the University of Maryland, told the Baltimore Banner that he had predicted that Maryland would be a target of the Trump administration because the state is heavily Democratic with political leaders who have been critical of the White House's immigration stance. "We have everything that the administration is looking to make an example of -- it's a state that will never be purple, or never turn red," Koulish said. Maryland has seen a surge in immigration arrests compared with the rest of the country, the Banner reported. Under Trump, average weekly ICE arrests in the state rose 165% through June of this year, compared with 2024, outpacing the 122% rise nationwide, according to the Banner's recent analysis of government data. Other states have seen even more. In Pennsylvania and West Virginia, weekly arrests have more than tripled under the administration. They have more than quadrupled in Virginia. Baltimore has also taken the president's criticism for other reasons, including his mentioning the city this week as part of a list of Democratic-led cities he calls crime-ridden. Maryland has become "ground zero" for some of the administration's "most aggressive and legally questionable immigration tactics," said Krish O'Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of the Baltimore-based Global Refuge, which helps immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers. "The message seems clear: There will be extreme pushback on jurisdictions like Maryland who welcome immigrants, defend their rights under the law, and hold the federal government accountable to its constitutional obligations," she told the Banner.
UPI
a few seconds ago
- UPI
Petro government seeks OK for largest budget in Colombia's history
Colombian president Gustavo Petro's government has proposed a national general budget bill that totals $138.4 billion that, if approved, would be the largest in the country's history. Photo by Carlos Ortega/EPA Aug. 13 (UPI) -- Colombia's Congress has begun to debate the 2026 national general budget bill, a proposal from President Gustavo Petro's government that totals $138.4 billion -- equal to 28.9% of the nation's gross domestic produce. If approved, it would be the largest in the nation's history. The proposal calls for a 6% to 8% increase over the 2025 budget and prioritizes social spending, debt service and public investment programs. Debate over the proposal comes amid strong criticism from oversight agencies and analysts because $6.53 billion of the budget depends on a tax reform that has yet to be approved. The Comptroller General's Office warned the shortfall poses a significant fiscal risk, especially since the government already has invoked an escape clause in the fiscal rule through 2028, allowing it to temporarily expand the deficit and debt beyond legal limits. In early August, the International Monetary Fund said Colombia's economy "is navigating a complex landscape." The IMF noted that "although growth has strengthened and inflation has declined, fiscal challenges remain and private investment continues to be restrained." The government's deficit rose from 4.2% of GDP in 2023 to 6.7% in 2024. As a result, gross public debt reached 61.2% of GDP at the end of 2024, approaching the fiscal rule's ceiling of 71% of GDP. "This underscores the need for sustained medium-term efforts," the IMF said. While the imbalance was not caused solely by Petro's administration, public spending has increased considerably during his tenure, particularly in operating expenses, as reflected in national budgets. This has kept government spending at levels similar to or higher than during the COVID-19 pandemic, but without any extraordinary event to justify it -- a predicament that worsens the deficit. In Colombia's current situation, boosting state revenue is among the most urgent priorities. Officials have discussed a more efficient and equitable structural tax reform, which could include changes to the value-added tax in certain sectors and a review of the personal income tax. José Manuel Restrepo, who served as commerce and finance minister under former President Iván Duque, criticized the activation of the fiscal escape clause. Regarding the tax reform needed to support the budget, he said it will not pass Congress. "So where will the $6.53 billion come from? Most likely from reduced investment," he said. "The country does need its wealthy to pay taxes, because the excessive debt left by Duque must be paid -- and not with the money of working people," Petro said on X. Another key factor is building confidence among markets and credit rating agencies. "For this, the government must be transparent in its fiscal projections and actions. Implementing a credible fiscal strategy with achievable goals is crucial to maintaining macroeconomic stability," economist Juan Carlos Gainza of Trading Colombia said. "The fiscal rule plays a vital role as the main tool for disciplining public finances and preventing excessive debt. But compliance is becoming increasingly difficult amid spending pressures and the need to finance a range of social and economic programs," Gainza said.
Washington Post
a few seconds ago
- Washington Post
Appeals court lets the White House suspend or end billions in foreign aid
WASHINGTON — A divided panel of appeals court judges ruled Wednesday that the Trump administration can suspend or terminate billions of dollars of congressionally appropriated funding for foreign aid. Two of three judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit concluded that grant recipients challenging the freeze did not meet the requirements for a preliminary injunction restoring the flow of money. In January, on the first day of his second term in the White House, Republican President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development to freeze spending on foreign aid. After groups of grant recipients sued to challenge that order, U.S. District Judge Amir Ali ordered the administration to release the full amount of foreign assistance that Congress had appropriated for the 2024 budget year. The appeal court's majority partially vacated Ali's order. Judges Karen LeCraft Henderson and Gregory Katsas concluded that the plaintiffs did not have a valid legal basis for the court to hear their claims. The ruling was not on the merits of whether the government unconstitutionally infringed on Congress' spending powers. 'The parties also dispute the scope of the district court's remedy but we need not resolve it ... because the grantees have failed to satisfy the requirements for a preliminary injunction in any event,' Henderson wrote. Judge Florence Pan, who dissented, said the Supreme Court has held 'in no uncertain terms' that the president does not have the authority to disobey laws for policy reasons. 'Yet that is what the majority enables today,' Pan wrote. 'The majority opinion thus misconstrues the separation-of-powers claim brought by the grantees, misapplies precedent, and allows Executive Branch officials to evade judicial review of constitutionally impermissible actions.' The money at issue includes nearly $4 billion for USAID to spend on global health programs and more than $6 billion for HIV and AIDS programs. Trump has portrayed the foreign aid as wasteful spending that does not align with his foreign policy goals. Henderson was nominated to the court by Republican President George H.W. Bush. Katsas was nominated by Trump. Pan was nominated by Democratic President Joe Biden.
