The Eighth Court of Appeals in El Paso has reinstated an attorney discipline complaint against Brent Webster, a high-ranking deputy to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. Webster was accused of misconduct in relation to his involvement in a case challenging the 2020 U.S. presidential election results, which saw Democrat Joe Biden emerge as the winner. In a 21-page ruling, the appeals court overturned the decision of a lower court judge who had concluded that Webster’s conduct in office was outside the purview of the state Commission for Lawyer Discipline.
According to the appeals court, state attorney ethics rules are applicable to the work conducted by attorneys within the state attorney general’s office. Webster and his legal representative have not yet provided any comment on the ruling, while a spokesperson for the lawyer disciplinary commission declined to comment as well.
It’s worth noting that Paxton, Webster’s superior, is currently facing impeachment proceedings following allegations of abuse of office. Paxton himself has also been accused of professional misconduct regarding his involvement in Texas’ failed U.S. Supreme Court election challenge. The Supreme Court swiftly dismissed the Texas lawsuit, which targeted Pennsylvania and other key battleground states.
Paxton is currently appealing a previous ruling that allowed the attorney misconduct complaint against him to proceed. This appeal is pending in a different appeals court. Paxton and Webster are among several lawyers across the country who have faced allegations of professional misconduct concerning their legal efforts to contest the 2020 election results.
Connect with legal job recruiters who understand your needs – sign up for LawCrossing now.
In a separate incident, a District of Columbia attorney ethics panel recently recommended the revocation of Donald Trump ally Rudy Giuliani’s law license due to his involvement in an election-related lawsuit in Pennsylvania. Giuliani, who previously served as the top federal prosecutor in Manhattan and as the mayor of New York City, has denied any violations of ethics rules.
The attorney discipline case against Webster was initially dismissed by a lower court judge in Texas back in 2021. The judge argued that allowing the state’s complaint to proceed would undermine the broad authority of the attorney general’s office to initiate and pursue lawsuits. However, Chief Justice Yvonne Rodriguez, writing on behalf of the appeals panel, stated that while the attorney general’s office possesses broad discretion, that power is not without limits. The court emphasized that alleged professional misconduct by an executive-branch attorney cannot be excused, regardless of the attorney’s discretion in representing the state in civil litigation.
The panel of judges hearing the case consisted of Chief Justice Yvonne Rodriguez, Judge Gina Palafox, and Judge Lisa Soto.
The reinstatement of the attorney discipline complaint against Webster highlights the significance of upholding ethical standards within the legal profession. This ruling serves as a reminder that attorneys working within government offices are not exempt from ethical oversight and must be held accountable for their actions. The outcome of this case will undoubtedly have implications for Webster’s career and the overall perception of the Texas attorney general’s office and its commitment to maintaining professional standards.
Don’t be a silent ninja! Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.