Latest news with #KenPaxton
Toronto Sun
5 hours ago
- Politics
- Toronto Sun
Divorce, adultery allegations against Republican Ken Paxton jolt Senate race in Texas
Angela Paxton filed paperwork to end their 38-year marriage 'on biblical grounds' after 'recent discoveries' Published Jul 22, 2025 • Last updated 6 minutes ago • 8 minute read Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, left, walks with his wife and Texas State Sen. Angela Paxton on the sideline before an NCAA college football game between Navy and SMU in Dallas, Oct. 14, 2022. Photo by LM Otero / AP Firebrand Texas Republican Ken Paxton's long record of political resilience in the face of scandal faces a new test after his wife filed for divorce and accused him of adultery, jolting a contentious primary for the U.S. Senate. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Don't have an account? Create Account The race, seen as one of the biggest GOP primaries of the midterms, was already dramatic, with a longtime incumbent, John Cornyn, fighting for his political life against Paxton, the state attorney general styling himself as more loyal to President Donald Trump. Now, Cornyn and his allies are bringing up the divorce filing as he runs against Paxton, and some Paxton backers are rethinking their support. Angela Paxton, a Republican state senator, recently accused Ken Paxton of adultery in a court filing and said she filed paperwork to end their 38-year marriage 'on biblical grounds' after 'recent discoveries.' Her comments caught some Paxton supporters off guard, prompting at least one group to drop its endorsement. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. 'There's no question that adultery is an attack on marriage,' Texas Values president Jonathan Saenz said in a recent interview with The Washington Post. Days later, the group withdrew its support for Ken Paxton, saying it was 'unsatisfied with the response' it received from his campaign when seeking more clarity. In his only public comments on the matter, Paxton said he and his wife had agreed to 'start a new chapter.' His campaign predicted that he would continue to persevere politically. 'Ken Paxton has faced more scrutiny and public attacks than any politician in Texas history,' Paxton adviser Nick Maddux said in a statement. 'The people of Texas will continue to have his back because they know he's a champion for our values, and there's nothing that's going to change that.' Your noon-hour look at what's happening in Toronto and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton attends a roundtable discussion at the Community Operations Center, Friday July 11, 2025 in Kerrville, Texas. (Ricardo B. Brazziell/Austin American-Statesman via AP) The divorce filing, which revived allegations of infidelity against Paxton, added a new potential obstacle to a political career that has survived securities fraud charges, as well as an impeachment trial in the state Senate related to a federal investigation of whistleblower allegations of misconduct that included bribery and abuse of office. Paxton was acquitted in the impeachment trial, made a deal with prosecutors last year to avoid a felony securities fraud trial and has remained a mainstay in Texas politics. While some Republicans predicted he would prevail again, others were less certain. Trump – whom both Cornyn and Paxton are trying to link themselves to in the primary campaign – has been publicly neutral in the race and has not commented on Paxton's personal life. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Cornyn's campaign had already been attacking Paxton over an allegation by Texas House impeachment managers during his 2023 impeachment trial that he used a fake Uber alias – 'Dave P.' – to carry out an extramarital affair years ago. Paxton's attorneys responded to the allegations at the time by claiming the case was politically motivated and lacked evidence. Cornyn said in an interview with The Washington Post that he did not plan to make a major issue out of the divorce filing, but at the same time, he suggested it was relevant for those who believe that 'character matters,' an early refrain he has used against Paxton. 'I think the fact that his wife has finally decided to file for divorce is going to tell a lot of people that there was more fire there where there was smoke,' Cornyn said. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. – – – 'That base is not leaving him' Paxton has won a streak of competitive statewide elections, repeatedly countering accusations of misconduct with unflinching support for Trump and, like Trump, denouncing his challenges as political witch hunts. He had his second-best fundraising day when his wife filed for divorce, according to a person close to him, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the fundraising numbers are not public yet. 'Ken Paxton has a base, and that base is not leaving him,' said Rep. Troy E. Nehls (R-Texas), an early Paxton supporter and Trump loyalist. 'If a divorce proceeding and a not-so-friendly divorce … disqualifies a person to be a member of Congress, I don't think we could establish a quorum up here.' This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Cornyn suggested that Paxton was not impervious to scandal, calling him an 'onion' because 'every time you peel back one layer of corruption, there's something beneath.' Plus, Cornyn argued, he is more prepared and better funded than any of Paxton's past opponents. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) has been trailing his primary opponent Ken Paxton in polls. MUST CREDIT: Matt McClain/The Washington Post Photo by Matt McClain / The Washington Post After an initial silence on the divorce, Cornyn's campaign has been bringing it up, releasing a digital ad Thursday about 'Dave P.' that raised the divorce filing and alleged that Paxton was 'at it again' after 'embarrassing his family once.' The incumbent has been trailing Paxton in polling for months, raising anxiety among national Republicans that they could be left with a nominee in Paxton who would make the race more competitive for Democrats. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Texas Reps. Wesley Hunt and Ronny Jackson are considered by some Republicans to be potential candidates to join the primary contest. Hunt often touts his family on social media – he is married with three young children – and did so again the morning after the news that Angela Paxton filed for divorce. Hunt has made the case to the White House that he solves a 'Texas-sized political problem,' arguing that he can win both the primary and the general election, according to a person close to him, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations. Though he has not filed to run, his campaign and allied groups have poured more than $2 million into ads this year aiming to boost his profile, some running in D.C. and Florida, where Trump resides. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Hunt recently flew with Trump on Air Force One to Texas to tour flood damage in the Hill Country, an area far from Hunt's Houston-based district. The only other Texas lawmakers on the flight were Cornyn and Sen. Ted Cruz (R). (Paxton joined Trump on the ground once they arrived.) The president has been careful in his public comments about the race, maintaining that he likes both Cornyn and Paxton. 'In a way, I wish they weren't running against each other,' Trump told reporters in late April. 'I'll make a decision somewhere along the line.' While Cornyn has been a reliable vote for Trump's agenda, Paxton and his allies have zeroed in on a few episodes when the senator was squarely at odds with Trump. Most notably, Cornyn initially resisted Trump's 2024 campaign, saying in May 2023 that his 'time has passed him by.' Cornyn ultimately endorsed Trump. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Paxton's side has also seized on Cornyn's lead role in crafting the bipartisan gun-control law that Congress passed after the 2022 school shooting in Uvalde, Texas. The proposal earned him boos at the Texas GOP convention that year, and Trump branded Cornyn a 'RINO' while opposing the deal. There is widespread GOP acknowledgment that Cornyn is on the clock to improve his standing in the primary contest before the December candidate filing deadline, and some Cornyn allies see Angela Paxton's comments as a potential trajectory-changer. Cornyn said that Trump 'may feel more comfortable' endorsing him if he can close the polling gap but that it may take longer than the filing deadline to do so. To prevail over Paxton, Cornyn said in the interview, will require two things: 'Remind people who I am and … remind people who my opponent is.' This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. – – – 'I felt for her' Angela Paxton announced the divorce filing – which accuses Ken Paxton of adultery, according to a petition reviewed by The Washington Post – in a social media post July 10. A judge ordered further case records to be sealed a day after she filed her petition, granting her request. Angela Paxton declined an interview request. Ken Paxton filed a brief response with the court generally denying the claims in the petition. Ken Paxton's personal life has long been a source of intrigue in his North Texas political base. The Paxtons, who have frequently referenced their Christian faith, have been political fixtures in Collin County, an affluent suburb north of Dallas that has been a GOP stronghold. The judge originally assigned to the divorce case, Jill Renfro Willis, recused herself without giving a reason, but her husband is Collin County District Attorney Greg Willis, a longtime friend of Ken Paxton. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. 'I know Angela Paxton well enough to know she is a woman of principle and character, and I would imagine there was a lot of thought that went into her public statement,' said George Fuller, a Republican former mayor of McKinney. 'I felt for her.' Zach Barrett, a conservative GOP political analyst from McKinney, said other local Republicans told him they would not vote for Ken Paxton because of the alleged infidelity, including Barrett's mother, who said, 'I've lost all respect.' Barrett said that he knows the Paxtons but also likes Hunt, and that he wasn't sure how he would vote. 'I do believe her. But do I continue to support Ken for his Senate race? If it's down to between him and John Cornyn, I will vote for Ken Paxton,' he said, because 'what he does behind closed doors doesn't affect me one bit.' This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Some Paxton supporters are hoping for more clarity. Saenz said in the interview, before the group withdrew its endorsement, that Republican voters may look at the divorce differently because Paxton's wife previously stood by him and many thought they had resolved – or were resolving – their issues. 'The reality is Paxton has never faced anything like he will over the next seven months, and this latest saga represents a tectonic shift in the race,' Aaron Whitehead, executive director of the pro-Cornyn Texans for a Conservative Majority, said in a statement. The super PAC recently started running TV ads statewide pitching Cornyn as 'the man who votes with President Trump over 99 percent of the time.' One Nation, a nonprofit closely aligned with Senate GOP leadership, plans to start spending in the race as soon as this week. Mark Phariss, a Democratic lawyer who ran against Angela Paxton for the state Senate in 2018, said he doesn't think the divorce details will do lasting damage to Ken Paxton's bid because of how politics has changed in recent years, as Trump and others have withstood numerous accusations about their personal conduct. 'In a normal time and a normal party, it would have an enormous impact. It would be a career-ender,' Phariss said. Sunshine Girls Canada Sunshine Girls Columnists Celebrity
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Democracy Upside Down
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. Last month, President Donald Trump's administration scrapped a long-standing Texas law that provided access to financial aid for 'Dreamers'—undocumented immigrants, brought into this country as children, who grew up here, graduated from local high schools, and are committed to becoming permanent residents. The administration's allies tried and failed to persuade the state legislature, which is controlled by Republicans, to repeal the law, which has had nearly a quarter century of bipartisan support. So the administration made an end run around Texas's democratic process: The Department of Justice hatched a plan with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to kill the law, filing a joint motion that asked a federal court to declare the Texas Dream Act unconstitutional. A judge approved the motion the very same day. The whole process took just six hours. Whatever one's views are on Dreamer policy, the fact is that this maneuver went against the will of the people of Texas. The organization I lead, Democracy Forward, has, along with several other groups, filed a motion to defend the law. Texans deserve to have the constitutionality of their Dream Act judged in court, not killed off via a collaboration between the president and the state attorney general. And even more alarming than the Trump administration's dismantling of this law is that it's part of a broader effort to short-circuit democracy at the state level. State-level democracy is essential to America's federalist system. During another time in U.S. history when a majority of the Supreme Court was imposing barriers to the public's ability to self-govern, Justice Louis D. Brandeis famously observed, 'It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.' Later, Justice William Brennan argued that states have the 'power to impose higher standards' under state law 'than is required under the Federal Constitution.' Throughout America's long history, state-level innovations have pushed the country forward: Some states abolished slavery long before the Civil War, granted women the right to vote before the Nineteenth Amendment was adopted, and legalized marriage equality years before the Supreme Court's Obergefell v. Hodges ruling. Of course, states have not always been on the side of human freedom and progress. Appeals to 'states' rights' have served as rallying cries for enslavers, segregationists, and others seeking to deny the rights of people and communities since the nation's founding. 'No state,' the Fourteenth Amendment proclaimed after the Civil War, shall 'deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.' When America's system of government works as it should, the federal government steps in to prevent states from undermining human freedom. [David Frum: The courts won't save democracy from Trump] That's what America saw in 1957, when President Dwight Eisenhower federalized the Arkansas National Guard to implement a Supreme Court ruling to desegregate schools; the governor, an avowed segregationist, had refused to comply. President John F. Kennedy similarly federalized the Alabama National Guard to carry out desegregation orders at the University of Alabama, again over the objection of a pro-segregation governor. Now the president and his political appointees, not a state's governor, are ignoring federal-court orders. In April, a federal court found that the government had exhibited 'a willful disregard for its Order' that planes carrying migrants who had been denied basic due process be turned around until the court could hear the migrants' case. (Democracy Forward and the ACLU represent the migrants in that matter.) Two months later, in early June, Trump federalized the California National Guard and deployed active-duty Marines to Los Angeles without the approval of Governor Gavin Newsom, who argued that local law enforcement was fully capable of managing anti-ICE protests. Trump's move was a federal flex that made a mockery of state sovereignty and democracy, and created more chaos than it solved. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said that what she saw in a local park 'looked like a city under siege, under armed occupation.' To justify its actions in California, the administration invoked Eisenhower's 1957 move to enforce federal-court orders on civil rights. Yet Trump's actions aim for the opposite of Eisenhower's. Instead of using federal power to protect people's rights, Trump is misusing federal power to undermine them. That is democracy upside down. Similarly, when Maine insisted that it would defend transgender athletes' participation on women's college-sports teams, the president brazenly interfered. Maine was following the law as it argued was set forth in Title IX and the state's Human Rights Act, but Trump sought to force a new interpretation of the federal law through executive actions, including a February order. That month, Trump pronounced, 'We are the federal law,' at which point the administration began a process to cut off funding to Maine's public-school meal programs as punishment—funds appropriated by Congress to help children in need. 'See you in court,' Maine Governor Janet Mills told the president. She did, and Maine won. The administration has also attempted to usurp the power that the Constitution provides both Congress and the states. Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution mandates that only states and Congress can make or alter the 'times, places, and manner' of holding federal elections. Ignoring that, Trump, in an executive order, has sought to impose federal time, place, and manner requirements that create barriers to the ballot box. Much of this executive order has been blocked by two federal courts in response to litigation filed by 19 states, among other parties. One federal judge found that the requirements Trump is seeking to impose would create time-consuming burdens on states and could chill voter participation— 'the antithesis of Congress's purpose in enacting' federal election laws. (The Trump administration is also pressuring Texas Republicans to redraw congressional districts in the middle of the decade, outside the normal cycle, to skew the midterm elections.) [Adam Serwer: Trump is wearing America down] The Trump administration has called lawsuits filed against its actions 'frivolous' and 'vexatious.' But as with so many of Trump's attacks, this is really a confession. The Texas ploy is just one of many ways the administration is undercutting the checks and balances in the U.S. constitutional system. The administration has eviscerated agencies and programs created by Congress, attacked judges and the legal profession as a whole, and attempted to stifle a free and open press through intimidation tactics. It's all in keeping with a theme: To empower one man, you need to disempower everyone else, everywhere else—including in states where laws are counter to the president's political agenda. What's happening in Texas, California, Maine, and other states goes beyond normal political disagreements or turf spats. This isn't the typical tug-of-war of federalism. The Trump administration is undermining foundational democratic principles and turning what are supposed to be 'laboratories of democracy' into laboratories of repression—something that should have no place in a nation founded on the promise of human freedom and the pursuit of happiness. Article originally published at The Atlantic
Atlantic
7 hours ago
- Politics
- Atlantic
Democracy Upside Down
Last month, President Donald Trump's administration scrapped a long-standing Texas law that provided access to financial aid for 'Dreamers'—undocumented immigrants, brought into this country as children, who grew up here, graduated from local high schools, and are committed to becoming permanent residents. The administration's allies tried and failed to persuade the state legislature, which is controlled by Republicans, to repeal the law, which has had nearly a quarter century of bipartisan support. So the administration made an end run around Texas's democratic process: The Department of Justice hatched a plan with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to kill the law, filing a joint motion that asked a federal court to declare the Texas Dream Act unconstitutional. A judge approved the motion the very same day. The whole process took just six hours. Whatever one's views are on Dreamer policy, the fact is that this maneuver went against the will of the people of Texas. The organization I lead, Democracy Forward, has, along with several other groups, filed a motion to defend the law. Texans deserve to have the constitutionality of their Dream Act judged in court, not killed off via a collaboration between the president and the state attorney general. And even more alarming than the Trump administration's dismantling of this law is that it's part of a broader effort to short-circuit democracy at the state level. State-level democracy is essential to America's federalist system. During another time in U.S. history when a majority of the Supreme Court was imposing barriers to the public's ability to self-govern, Justice Louis D. Brandeis famously observed, 'It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous state may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.' Later, Justice William Brennan argued that states have the 'power to impose higher standards' under state law 'than is required under the Federal Constitution.' Throughout America's long history, state-level innovations have pushed the country forward: Some states abolished slavery long before the Civil War, granted women the right to vote before the Nineteenth Amendment was adopted, and legalized marriage equality years before the Supreme Court's Obergefell v. Hodges ruling. Of course, states have not always been on the side of human freedom and progress. Appeals to 'states' rights' have served as rallying cries for enslavers, segregationists, and others seeking to deny the rights of people and communities since the nation's founding. 'No state,' the Fourteenth Amendment proclaimed after the Civil War, shall 'deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.' When America's system of government works as it should, the federal government steps in to prevent states from undermining human freedom. David Frum: The courts won't save democracy from Trump That's what America saw in 1957, when President Dwight Eisenhower federalized the Arkansas National Guard to implement a Supreme Court ruling to desegregate schools; the governor, an avowed segregationist, had refused to comply. President John F. Kennedy similarly federalized the Alabama National Guard to carry out desegregation orders at the University of Alabama, again over the objection of a pro-segregation governor. Now the president and his political appointees, not a state's governor, are ignoring federal-court orders. In April, a federal court found that the government had exhibited 'a willful disregard for its Order' that planes carrying migrants who had been denied basic due process be turned around until the court could hear the migrants' case. (Democracy Forward and the ACLU represent the migrants in that matter.) Two months later, in early June, Trump federalized the California National Guard and deployed active-duty Marines to Los Angeles without the approval of Governor Gavin Newsom, who argued that local law enforcement was fully capable of managing anti-ICE protests. Trump's move was a federal flex that made a mockery of state sovereignty and democracy, and created more chaos than it solved. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said that what she saw in a local park 'looked like a city under siege, under armed occupation.' To justify its actions in California, the administration invoked Eisenhower's 1957 move to enforce federal-court orders on civil rights. Yet Trump's actions aim for the opposite of Eisenhower's. Instead of using federal power to protect people's rights, Trump is misusing federal power to undermine them. That is democracy upside down. Similarly, when Maine insisted that it would defend transgender athletes' participation on women's college-sports teams, the president brazenly interfered. Maine was following the law as it argued was set forth in Title IX and the state's Human Rights Act, but Trump sought to force a new interpretation of the federal law through executive actions, including a February order. That month, Trump pronounced, 'We are the federal law,' at which point the administration began a process to cut off funding to Maine's public-school meal programs as punishment—funds appropriated by Congress to help children in need. 'See you in court,' Maine Governor Janet Mills told the president. She did, and Maine won. The administration has also attempted to usurp the power that the Constitution provides both Congress and the states. Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution mandates that only states and Congress can make or alter the 'times, places, and manner' of holding federal elections. Ignoring that, Trump, in an executive order, has sought to impose federal time, place, and manner requirements that create barriers to the ballot box. Much of this executive order has been blocked by two federal courts in response to litigation filed by 19 states, among other parties. One federal judge found that the requirements Trump is seeking to impose would create time-consuming burdens on states and could chill voter participation— 'the antithesis of Congress's purpose in enacting' federal election laws. (The Trump administration is also pressuring Texas Republicans to redraw congressional districts in the middle of the decade, outside the normal cycle, to skew the midterm elections.) Adam Serwer: Trump is wearing America down The Trump administration has called lawsuits filed against its actions 'frivolous' and 'vexatious.' But as with so many of Trump's attacks, this is really a confession. The Texas ploy is just one of many ways the administration is undercutting the checks and balances in the U.S. constitutional system. The administration has eviscerated agencies and programs created by Congress, attacked judges and the legal profession as a whole, and attempted to stifle a free and open press through intimidation tactics. It's all in keeping with a theme: To empower one man, you need to disempower everyone else, everywhere else—including in states where laws are counter to the president's political agenda. What's happening in Texas, California, Maine, and other states goes beyond normal political disagreements or turf spats. This isn't the typical tug-of-war of federalism. The Trump administration is undermining foundational democratic principles and turning what are supposed to be 'laboratories of democracy' into laboratories of repression—something that should have no place in a nation founded on the promise of human freedom and the pursuit of happiness.
Wall Street Journal
21 hours ago
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
Texas Attorney General Asks to Pause Highland Bankruptcy for Charity Probe
The Texas attorney general is looking into a nonprofit foundation linked to bankrupt investment manager Highland Capital Management following a dispute over roughly $270 million in charitable assets involving former Highland Chief Executive James Dondero. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton last week sought to pause proceedings in Highland's chapter 11 case as he investigates people and organizations involved in the case, court records show. Paxton is looking into the operations of Charitable DAF Holdings Corp., a U.S. affiliate of a Cayman Islands company set up in 2011 by Dondero to support several nonprofits, according to documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal and people familiar with the matter.
Washington Post
a day ago
- Politics
- Washington Post
Divorce, adultery allegations against Paxton jolt Senate race in Texas
Firebrand Texas Republican Ken Paxton's long record of political resilience in the face of scandal faces a new test after his wife filed for divorce and accused him of adultery, jolting a contentious primary for U.S. Senate. The race, seen as one of the biggest GOP primaries of the midterms, was already dramatic, with a longtime incumbent, John Cornyn, fighting for his political life against Paxton, the state attorney general styling himself as more loyal to President Donald Trump. Now, Cornyn and his allies are bringing up the filing as they run against Paxton, and some Paxton backers are rethinking their support.
