In a federal lawsuit filed on December 31, 2024, conservative activist and election integrity advocate Dr. Steven F. Hotze has brought explosive allegations against Harris County District Attorney Kim Ogg, her office, and unnamed associates. The case, filed in the Southern District of Texas, accuses the District Attorney of spearheading a coordinated and malicious legal campaign designed to silence Dr. Hotze’s outspoken political views, disrupt his advocacy, and punish him for his role in exposing alleged voter fraud in Harris County during the contentious 2020 election.
A Decades-Long Political Rivalry
Dr. Hotze, a high-profile Republican and director of the nonprofit Liberty Center for God and Country, has had a long and public feud with Kim Ogg, a prominent Democrat. Their ideological divide spans decades, and both figures have openly clashed on issues such as crime, religion, and election integrity. According to the lawsuit, this longstanding animosity escalated when Dr. Hotze became a vocal critic of alleged ballot harvesting and election fraud, targeting local Democratic campaigns, including those of Ogg herself.
The court filings detail how Dr. Hotze raised funds and campaigned against Democratic candidates in Harris County, advocating for election integrity and denouncing voter fraud. His Liberty Center uncovered alleged illegal voting activities tied to individuals reportedly compensated by Ogg’s campaign. Despite presenting these findings to the District Attorney’s Office, no action was taken to address the allegations. Instead, Dr. Hotze claims he became the target of retaliatory legal actions orchestrated by Ogg.
The 2020 Traffic Incident and Its Fallout
The genesis of the legal battle can be traced to an October 2020 traffic accident involving Mark Aguirre, a former Houston Police Department captain and independent contractor for Liberty Center. Aguirre, who was investigating voter fraud on behalf of the organization, was involved – per the pleading – in a minor fender bender with David Lopez, a private citizen. According to police records, Aguirre flagged down a passing officer and reported the incident. He was issued a traffic citation for failing to control his speed, and neither party was arrested.
Despite his absence from the scene, Dr. Hotze alleges that the incident was later weaponized against him. In March 2021, Lopez filed a personal injury lawsuit against Dr. Hotze—not Aguirre—alleging false imprisonment, assault, and other claims. This civil lawsuit marked the beginning of what Dr. Hotze describes as a calculated legal campaign to harass and intimidate him.
Civil Discovery as a Pretext for Criminal Charges
A key allegation in Dr. Hotze’s lawsuit is the claim that the civil case was manipulated to facilitate a criminal investigation against him. According to court documents, the private attorneys representing Lopez—led by K. Scott Brazil, a lawyer with ties to the Texas Democratic Party—worked closely with the District Attorney’s Office to use civil discovery processes as a backdoor to gather evidence for criminal charges. This coordination, Dr. Hotze argues, violated his Fifth Amendment rights by compelling him to provide information without knowing he was under criminal investigation.
During discovery in the civil case, Dr. Hotze was required to produce financial documents, participate in depositions, and answer detailed interrogatories. These requests sought information that prosecutors would not typically be entitled to in a criminal proceeding without a court order. Dr. Hotze contends that the District Attorney’s Office concealed its involvement in the case, depriving him of the opportunity to assert his constitutional right to remain silent.
A Series of Criminal Indictments
The legal pressure intensified in December 2021 when Aguirre was indicted for unlawful restraint and aggravated assault related to the 2020 traffic incident. Nine months later, in April 2022, a grand jury indicted Dr. Hotze on identical charges. The lawsuit asserts that the charges were politically motivated, with no evidence linking Dr. Hotze to the alleged actions.
The situation escalated further in August 2024, when Dr. Hotze was indicted a second time, this time on charges of engaging in organized criminal activity and aggravated robbery. This second indictment, issued nearly four years after the initial events, added to claims that the legal actions were designed to retaliate against him for his continued political activism. Dr. Hotze was arrested following the second indictment and spent 24 hours in jail. The arrest, he alleges, was unnecessarily publicized to humiliate him and deter his advocacy.
Alleged Coordination Between Civil and Criminal Cases
Dr. Hotze’s lawsuit outlines a timeline of alleged collaboration between the District Attorney’s Office and private attorneys involved in the civil case. It claims that the attorneys, including K. Scott Brazil and Dicky Grigg, shared deposition transcripts, discovery materials, and legal strategies with prosecutors. This information, the lawsuit contends, was used to build the criminal cases against Dr. Hotze.
The complaint also highlights a pattern of procedural irregularities. Dr. Hotze was not notified that he was a target of a criminal investigation, a standard practice in such cases. The absence of this notification prevented him from asserting his Fifth Amendment rights during the civil proceedings. Moreover, the civil case continued unabated despite the criminal charges, forcing Dr. Hotze to navigate simultaneous legal battles that the lawsuit claims were designed to disadvantage him.
Timing of Legal Actions Raises Questions
The lawsuit raises serious concerns about the timing of the indictments and legal actions against Dr. Hotze. For instance, the first indictment was issued shortly after Dr. Hotze hosted an election integrity gala attended by prominent conservative figures, including Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell. The second indictment came just weeks before the expiration of Ogg’s term as District Attorney, further fueling allegations of political motivations.
Adding to the complexity, the civil case against Dr. Hotze is scheduled for trial in February 2025, months before the criminal case is expected to be resolved. Dr. Hotze’s legal team argues that this scheduling places him in an unconstitutional bind, forcing him to either waive his Fifth Amendment rights or risk an adverse judgment in the civil trial.
Constitutional Claims and Relief Sought
Dr. Hotze’s lawsuit identifies multiple constitutional violations, including:
• First Amendment Retaliation: The legal actions against Dr. Hotze are alleged to be a deliberate effort to suppress his political speech and activism.
• Fifth Amendment Violations: The coordinated use of civil discovery to gather evidence for criminal prosecution is described as a circumvention of Dr. Hotze’s right to remain silent.
• Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Violations: The lawsuit asserts that Dr. Hotze was targeted for his political beliefs, while no comparable actions were taken against individuals aligned with opposing political views.
The lawsuit seeks injunctive relief to delay the civil trial until after the resolution of the criminal case. It also demands compensatory and punitive damages to address the harm to Dr. Hotze’s reputation, professional life, and emotional well-being.
Implications for Prosecutorial Conduct
The case against Kim Ogg and the Harris County District Attorney’s Office has broader implications for the intersection of politics and prosecutorial power. By framing the legal actions as a coordinated campaign to silence a political opponent, Dr. Hotze’s lawsuit raises questions about the use of legal processes as tools for retaliation. As the case moves forward, it is likely to draw national attention and could serve as a pivotal test of constitutional protections in politically charged disputes.
Disclaimer
The content provided in this publication is for educational and informational purposes only. The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News strives to deliver accurate and impactful stories. However, readers are advised to seek professional legal counsel and guidance for their specific legal inquiries and concerns. The publication does not assume any responsibility for actions taken by individuals based on the information presented.
Additionally, while every effort is made to ensure the reliability of the information, the publication does not warrant the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of the content. Readers are encouraged to verify any legal information with official sources and to use their discretion when interpreting and applying the information provided.
A Couple of Our Other Reads
You may be interested in our publishing on a Galveston County lawsuit alleging excessive force.
Or you may find our publishing on a Montgomery County lawsuit filed by a prior federal agent of interest.
Follow Us on Social Media
If you are interested in staying updated on matters about your government in Texas and other important stories, trust The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News to provide reliable information that matters to you. You can follow us on social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, X, Reddit, YouTube, Tumblr, and LinkedIn to stay connected and informed.
FACEBOOK: TheHawksEyeNews
INSTAGRAM: Hawk_s_Eye_C_and_N
X: TheHawksEyeNews
REDDIT: TheHawksEyeCN
YOUTUBE: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
TUMBLR: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
LINKEDIN: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News