Latest news with #Chapter56
Yahoo
17-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Five district attorneys sue Ken Paxton to block new rule requiring them to hand over case records
Five Texas district attorneys are suing Attorney General Ken Paxton in two separate lawsuits filed Friday over new rules that would give the state's top law enforcer meticulous access to their office's records. The two lawsuits, filed in Travis County District Court, seek to overturn a new rule created by Paxton's office giving the attorney general office's employees discretion to request almost all documents from cases county officials work on, regardless of whether they are being pursued. The district attorneys suing Paxton said the rule is an unconstitutional overreach that would needlessly burden offices who would have to present 'terabytes' of data to the attorney general. The rule, which took effect in April, only applies to counties with 400,000 residents or more — a threshold only 13 counties in the state meets. Paxton's office has marked the provision as a way to 'rein in rogue district attorneys' refusing to uphold the law. District attorneys from Travis and El Paso counties filed one suit, while district attorneys from Harris, Dallas and Bexar counties filed another. Both seek to block Paxton from being able to enforce the rule, alleging it violates the state constitution and federal law. The background: The rule was originally proposed in the administrative code in September 2024 as Chapter 56 and requires district attorneys to provide all documents or communications produced or received by district attorneys' offices, including confidential information. Included in the rule's definition of 'case file' materials eligible for review are all documents, correspondence and handwritten notes relevant to a case. It also requires counties to submit quarterly reports to the attorney general on twelve different subjects, including specific information on indictments of police officers or for violations of election code. The new Chapter 56 rules cite a 1985 statute prompting district and county attorneys to report information to the attorney general 'in the form that the attorney general directs.' To enforce the collection of documents and communication, the rule would create an 'oversight advisory committee' composed of employees from the attorney general's office. The committee would be able to request entire case files from district attorneys at their discretion. Failing to provide the requested documentation to the advisory committee would result in 'official misconduct' under the rule, allowing a district judge to remove a district attorney from office. Why the district attorneys sued: The two lawsuits both claim the law cited by the new Chapter 56 does not provide Paxton's office with the sweeping jurisdiction the rule creates — and that providing the information requested would be both expensive and illegal. One lawsuit from Dallas, Harris and Bexar county attorneys claims the rule seeks to achieve a 'political objective' by burdening officials and creating strict consequences for noncompliance. 'These reporting requirements do not make communities safer,' Bexar County District Attorney Joe Gonzales said. 'They do not identify trends, improve transparency, or enhance public trust. Instead, they create barriers that divert limited resources away from what matters most, which is prosecuting violent offenders and protecting our community.' The trio's lawsuit also maintains the rule violates the Texas Constitution's protections on separation of powers because the attorney general has 'no authority' to expand the definition of official misconduct. The second lawsuit filed by the district attorneys from El Paso and Travis counties marks similar issues with the new rule, and also claims it would require illegally forfeiting the private information of victims working with their offices. In a press release from March, Paxton's office states the new rule will help 'assist citizens' in judging prosecutors' performance, which attorneys in the second suit worry indicates private information could be shared with the public. 'The Challenged Rules purport to require an unprecedented level of disclosure of privileged and confidential information from only some of the State's prosecutors for the sole purpose of unconstitutional oversight,' the lawsuit reads. What Paxton says: The attorney general has lauded the new rule as a way to help the public better understand how their local prosecutors are operating, and create consequences for those who do not act. In a statement to the Texas Tribune about the lawsuit, Paxton called the rule a 'straightforward, common-sense measure' that aims to shed light on attorneys who may be refusing to prosecute dangerous crimes. "It is no surprise that rogue DAs who would rather turn violent criminals loose on the streets than do their jobs are afraid of transparency and accountability,' Paxton said in a statement about the lawsuit from Dallas, Harris and Bexar county officials. 'This lawsuit is meritless and merely a sad, desperate attempt to conceal information from the public they were sworn to protect." Paxton's office also waived concerns about potentially burdensome time or financial costs, stating in the Texas Register that their assessment finds 'minimal, if any, fiscal impact.' Other factors: The new rule is not the only way elected officials in Texas have sought to rein in 'rogue' district attorneys in recent years through a similar enforcement mechanism. The state Legislature passed House Bill 17 in 2023, which allows courts to remove district attorneys who refuse to prosecute certain crimes, also through 'official misconduct' designation. Republican lawmakers at the time rallied behind the bill after criticizing Democratic district attorneys for not pursuing alleged voter fraud or prosecuting abortion-related cases. José Garza, the Democratic district attorney for Travis County who joined El Paso and Bexar counties in suing Paxton, was unsuccessfully sued through the law's provision in 2024. First round of TribFest speakers announced! Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Maureen Dowd; U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-San Antonio; Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker; U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California; and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Dallas are taking the stage Nov. 13–15 in Austin. Get your tickets today!
Yahoo
29-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Derry shuts down 6 massage parlors
Six massage parlors in Derry were forced to close this month for violations, including one establishment that employed someone with a prostitution conviction in another state, a town official said. The town ordered Little Tokyo Spa at 127 Rockingham Road, LZ Asian Spa at 34 Manchester Road, Wei Lan Bodywork and Spa at 49 Birch St., and Orange Orange at 37 Crystal Ave. to cease and desist for violating Chapter 56, a town ordinance regulating massage spas. Two other spas were also ordered to cease and desist — Star Day Spa at 4 Peabody Road Annex and Orange Tree Spa at 92 W. Broadway — which the town says were operating under New Hampshire esthetician licenses and also violated the town ordinance. Incoming Town Administrator Mike Fowler said the violations varied, but included unlicensed technicians working under a single state license, a technician with a felony prostitution conviction, and explicit advertisements offering services not allowed at massage spas. Before Derry adopted a new ordinance in 2023, all a massage therapist needed to operate in town was proof of a license through the state's Office of Professional Licensure and Certification. Town leaders decided that wasn't enough and started requiring that licenses with the state be in good standing and their applications were legitimate. 'Well above a common massage' Fowler said residents reported activity beyond the scope of spas set out by the state and town at several parlors. The town's new licensing process began in March 2024 and after a year, the town's health and code enforcement departments scrutinized the businesses during the renewal process. What they found was shocking, Fowler said. 'There were some things that started to pop up on six of the locations and we had to take action to issue cease and desist orders on those businesses,' Fowler said. 'The common theme with all six of these locations is that we were finding advertisements, and they all look basically the same, that were essentially solicitations for things well above a common massage.' He said when officials searched the names of the businesses on the internet, they found 'references with pretty explicit photos and references to services' that are not part of a massage spa license. Last Thursday, town councilors voted 7-0 to rescind Wei Lan Bodywork and Spa's license after the owner appealed and had been allowed to operate on a temporary basis. The business had recently moved from Manning Street to Birch Street. Also by a unanimous vote, the Town Council upheld its decision to rescind the license of Orange Orange, run by Yung Cui, at an emergency Saturday morning meeting April 5. Cui had appealed the council's earlier decision, stating she didn't understand the rules when it came to advertising. After further investigation, officials found other violations as well, Fowler said. Massage parlor ads Several of the massage parlors have pages on Facebook and review sites such as Yelp. Little Tokyo Spa's Facebook page displayed an ad that included 'New Young Girl & Best Choice … There are sweet and gentle girls here … The girls will give you a unique feeling.' One of the pictures with that post, dated Sept. 18, 2024, included a suggestive picture of a young Asian woman who was not giving a massage. On Monday afternoon, most of the massage parlors that had their licenses revoked no longer had reviews, pictures or working website addresses on Yelp and other sites, and previous suggestive posts on TikTok were no longer available. Enforcing the ordinance Fowler said it's difficult for the health and code enforcement departments in Derry to enforce rules on massage parlors because the ownership of the businesses frequently changes hands and many basically share licenses among several workers. Fowler said after the meeting upholding the revocation of Orange Orange's license, someone else applied for a license at the location under a different name. 'Since then, we've received a change of use for that location where somebody had come in, another name, another person seeking to reopen under a new ownership structure. So, we're navigating that piece of it. It's been a challenge,' he said. 'It's a shell game that gets played because as soon as you know, we take an action for cease and desist, and two, three, four days later, another person comes up and the business has been sold or allegedly sold to a new owner. And now, they're asking for an application and they have a valid license from the state of New Hampshire.' Fowler said several establishments have moved from Salem to Derry after being shut down there. 'Derry just happens to be now at the epicenter of this in southern New Hampshire, so we are taking actions within our ordinance,' he said. The town has cracked down, but Fowler would like to see state regulators take a more active role in investigating business credentials before issuing licenses. 'We have written several inquiries to them, and never received anything back,' Fowler said. Fowler said he could not comment on whether there are any criminal investigations by the Derry Police
