Topline
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton asked a state court Tuesday to hold former Rep. Beto O’Rourke in criminal contempt for raising money for Democratic lawmakers who are staying out of state, alleging O’Rourke violated a court order restricting his fundraising efforts—and making claims that O’Rourke’s lawyer has slammed as an “outright lie.”
Paxton asked the court to hold O’Rourke in contempt — and potentially imprison him — for violating a previous order the court issued on August 8, which blocked O’Rourke and his group Powered By People from using funds for “non-political purposes” while the case moves forward.
Paxton sued O’Rourke after his group fundraised to help the state’s Democrats, who have left Texas in order to deny the Texas House the quorum it needs to vote on new congressional maps.
The attorney general argued Tuesday that O’Rourke should be held in contempt because he’s continued to fundraise after the court issued its ruling, pointing to comments the Democrat has made urging supporters to donate to Powered by People and O’Rourke saying at a recent rally, “There are no refs in this game, f–k the rules.”
Paxton asked the court to fine O’Rourke and Powered by People $500 per act that violated the court’s ruling, which is the maximum allowed under state law, and for the court to imprison O’Rourke “unless and until he demonstrates a willingness to abide by the Court’s orders pending the outcome of this lawsuit.”
A representative for O’Rourke has not yet responded to a request for comment, but O’Rourke’s attorney Mimi Marziani has denied Paxton’s allegations, telling Politico the attorney general’s characterization of O’Rourke’s rally comments is an “outright lie” and she intends to ask the court to sanction Paxton in response.
Marziani told Politico that Paxton’s filing mischaracterizes O’Rourke’s comments to “f–ck the rules,” saying the Democrat was referring more generally to Republicans’ national push for redistricting and not the court’s ruling on his fundraising. “In their zeal I guess to intimidate a political rival, they are actually lying to the court,” Marziani said. The lawyer described Paxton’s suit against O’Rourke as being “frivolous” and denied that O’Rourke violated the court’s ruling, arguing the order only bars raising money that directly bankrolls the Texas Democrats and not general fundraising.
It’s unclear how or when the court will rule on the issue of O’Rourke being held in contempt. Fahey has shown she’s sympathetic to some of Paxton’s arguments against O’Rourke’s fundraising, saying in her order Friday she believes it’s likely Powered by People violated laws on deceptive trade practices by raising political donations to fund lawmakers’ personal expenses. Still, it remains to be seen if she would go as far as holding the Democrat in contempt.
Powered by People has not released numbers yet regarding how much it’s raised or spent in connection with the Texas Democrats’ stays out of state, whether before or after Fahey’s ruling restricting the group’s fundraising. ABC News previously reported Powered by People is donating to the Texas House Democratic Caucus, rather than to lawmakers directly or to cover any specific expenses.
In addition to O’Rourke and Powered by People, Republican officials have also sought to punish the Democratic lawmakers on the basis of the donations they’re getting to leave and stay out of state, suggesting the legislators may face bribery charges. Under Texas’ bribery law, an official can be prosecuted for bribery if they accepted a benefit “pursuant to an express agreement to take or withhold a specific exercise” of their office, but there has to be “direct evidence” of the bribery agreement, and it has to be clear that the official’s action would not have been taken if they didn’t get the benefit from it. While the full scope of Powered by People and other donors’ work with the Texas Democrats is still unclear, legal experts have so far been skeptical that the fundraising runs afoul of the law. “The overall idea of a group supporting the Texas Democrats as a whole or individually, just supporting them with funds, is inherently not illegal,” Texas-based political attorney Andrew Cates told Forbes last week, prior to Fahey’s ruling in the case against O’Rourke.
More than 50 Democratic state lawmakers left Texas last week in order to deny the Texas House the quorum it needs to vote on new congressional maps, which would create at least five additional Republican-leaning seats. The legislators have taken up shelter in Democratic-led states like Illinois, prompting Republicans to start using a number of legal tactics to try and force the legislators’ return, including issuing arrest warrants against the lawmakers and filing lawsuits seeking to expel them on the basis of them reneging on their duties. Powered by People has emerged as one of the major groups funding the Democrats’ travel and stays out of state, with O’Rourke repeatedly soliciting donations to his group in order to support the quorum break. Texas is the first in a potential string of states that could pursue redistricting ahead of the 2026 midterms, in light of historic trends suggesting Democrats are likely to pick up seats as the minority party. GOP-led states including Florida, Indiana and Missouri have floated creating new maps in order to give the party a boost in the midterms, which has also led some Democratic-led states like California to consider their own redistricting in response.