On Oct. 1, the Fifteenth Court of Appeals upheld a Travis County district court decision that prevents Attorney General Ken Paxton from imposing sweeping reporting requirements on district attorneys in Texas’ 13 most populous counties. The appellate court ruled that Paxton lacks the authority to compel these prosecutors to turn over internal policies, correspondence and case files deemed confidential.
Background of the contested rules
In March 2025, Paxton announced new rules aimed at chief prosecutors in counties with populations of 400,000 or more. He said the measures were intended to help citizens determine whether local elected officials were inadequately prosecuting certain categories of crime, releasing dangerous criminals back into the community, engaging in selective prosecution, or otherwise failing to uphold their obligations.
The rules would have required urban prosecutors to provide extensive data, including internal policies, correspondence and case files that contain protected victim and witness information such as child‑abuse records and pornography investigations. Critics argued that the mandate threatened confidential and legally protected information and would divert critical prosecutorial resources.
Legal challenge and court rulings
Dallas County Criminal District Attorney John Creuzot, along with district attorneys from Harris and Bexar counties, sued Paxton a few weeks after the rules were announced. They contended that the regulations overstepped the Attorney General’s powers, infringed on the judiciary, and imposed an unnecessary burden on prosecutors.
In its Oct. 1 memorandum opinion, the Fifteenth Court of Appeals affirmed the lower‑court finding that Paxton does not have the authority to create these sweeping reporting requirements. The appellate court’s decision reinforces the principle that locally elected prosecutors retain independence from state‑level directives that are not expressly authorized by law.
Reactions from local officials
“This is another important victory for the rule of law and for the independence of locally elected prosecutors,” Creuzot said in a statement. “At every turn, the courts have repeatedly affirmed what we argued from the beginning: the Attorney General does not have the authority to create these sweeping reporting requirements.”
Paxton’s office did not immediately respond to requests for comment, nor did it indicate whether the administration plans to appeal the decision to the Texas Supreme Court.
Implications for Texas prosecutors
The ruling preserves the ability of district attorneys in Dallas, Harris, Bexar and other large counties to keep sensitive case information confidential, protecting victims and witnesses while allowing prosecutors to focus on core law‑enforcement duties. It also signals to the state administration that any future attempts to expand oversight must be grounded in clear statutory authority.
Legal experts note that the decision may limit the scope of future statewide initiatives that seek to centralize data collection without explicit legislative backing. For now, local prosecutors can continue their work without the added reporting burden that Paxton’s rules would have imposed.
Original reporting: Texarkana Gazette — read the source article.
