Texas Lawmakers Target ‘Woke’ District Attorneys

Texas’ current legislative session is almost in full swing, and there is a myriad of items on the docket. Lawmakers are already in Austin preparing to determine what the Lone Star State’s political landscape will look like for the next two years. One of the issues that will certainly be a hot debate is criminal justice, especially concerning what discretion district attorneys can use when deciding which cases to prosecute.

Over the past five years, crime has become a major problem in cities across the country amid the COVID-19 pandemic and widespread unrest after the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis. Along with these problems came the rise of far-leftist district attorneys who came to power in cities like Los Angeles, New York, and others.

These officials have been employing a so-called progressive approach to criminal justice that seems to favor protecting criminals over law-abiding citizens. Their policies have caused no small amount of controversy and have been criticized by the people impacted most. This problem has made its way even to red states like Texas, whose legislature is seeking to address the matter. But could they go too far?

Texas Lawmakers Target ‘Woke’ District Attorneys

Texas lawmakers are reportedly planning to go after “rogue” prosecutors who refuse to enforce state laws for certain types of offenses. If passed, their legislation could have these officials removed from office or subject them to investigation.

State Sen. Mayes Middleton (R) submitted a bill last Friday that would compel district attorneys to prosecute suspected criminals for their alleged crimes and empower Attorney General Ken Paxton to target officials who do not enforce laws. The state would be given the ability to possibly remove these prosecutors from office, Fox News has reported.

“Every district attorney has taken an oath to protect and defend the laws and Constitution of the State of Texas. They are violating their oath of office and do not have the constitutional authority to choose which classes of offenses to prosecute. George-Soros-backed DAs are endangering our communities with policies of non-prosecution,” Middleton argued.

He continued:

“In Texas, we support law and order. Criminals that violate our laws and endanger our communities should be prosecuted, and justice should be served. Our justice system cannot function when DAs are allowed to cafeteria-style pick-and-choose which laws to follow and which to ignore. It is up to the legislature to pass laws and for district attorneys to enforce them, period.”

If it becomes law, the bill will prohibit district attorneys from declining to prosecute individuals accused of violent crimes and offenses related to property and elections. Additionally, prosecutors would not be allowed to refrain from seeking the death penalty against suspects accused of having committed capital crimes. Finally, the proposed legislation would disallow officials to avoid prosecuting illegal immigrants as well.

“If it is believed a prosecutor refuses to apply the laws, the attorney general can require that DA to formally state their reason why and provide any material requested. Prosecutors can also be subjected to an investigation over their alleged failure,” according to Fox News.

Under the proposal, Texas residents would be able to file a complaint with the attorney general’s office to remove a district attorney. After the filing is assessed by the attorney general’s office, it can ask a court to fire the prosecutor in question.

The Dallas Morning News published a piece indicating the measures could be designed to target Dallas County District Attorney John Creuzot, who declared in 2019 that his office would not prosecute thefts of necessary items like diapers, baby formula, and food between the amounts of $100 and $750 unless it was shown that the suspect did it to make money. He also indicated that he would not target abortion providers or adults who obtain certain types of transgender treatment for their children, which could violate laws passed in Texas last year. Lastly, his office has refrained from prosecuting those found to be possessing small quantities of marijuana.

Pros and Cons

The proposed legislation would likely be hailed by Republicans as a way to stop progressive district attorneys from shielding criminals from consequences. Indeed, if prosecutors are forbidden to give leniency to those suspected of violent offenses, this could very well be the case.

Preventing officials from turning a blind eye to those violating laws restricting abortion and surgical treatments for children suffering from gender dysphoria could safeguard the lives of babies in the womb and kids dealing with mental illness.

However, the way the law could be applied would essentially remove an inordinate level of discretion from those charged with meting out justice. In some cases, it might not be appropriate to prosecute every single person suspected of a violent offense. It could also result in inappropriate punishments for minor marijuana offenses and others that might not warrant harsh sentences.

Moreover, it could allow the state to override the will of the people who elected the district attorney in question – if a community wants an official who will only prosecute the crimes the people deem as most important, enabling the state to interfere might not be the best course of action. From a liberty perspective, it could be problematic.

Of course, it is essential to note that these measures will be vigorously debated in the Texas legislature so it is possible that a level of balance could be found. Perhaps lawmakers can come to an agreement that would allow for prosecutorial discretion while also protecting the natural rights of the citizenry.