Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has implemented a new rule requiring district and county attorneys in the state’s largest counties to submit regular performance reports to his office, a move Paxton says is aimed at holding “rogue DAs” accountable and ensuring violent criminals are prosecuted.
The rule, adopted under Chapter 56 of the Texas Administrative Code and effective April 2, 2025, applies to prosecutors serving counties with populations of 400,000 or more. It mandates the submission of detailed initial, quarterly, and annual reports on a range of prosecutorial decisions, including indictments of law enforcement officers and election-related offenses, deferred prosecutions, and policies not to prosecute entire categories of crimes.
“District and County Attorneys have a duty to protect the communities they serve by upholding the law and vigorously prosecuting dangerous criminals,” Paxton said in a press release. “In many major counties, the people responsible for safeguarding millions of Texans have instead endangered lives by refusing to prosecute criminals.”
The new rules stem from Paxton’s interpretation of Texas Government Code §41.006, which authorizes the attorney general to require prosecutors to report information “relating to criminal matters and the interests of the state.” The Office of the Attorney General (OAG) says the rule is designed to ensure transparency, accountability, and public awareness about prosecutorial performance—particularly in cases involving violent crime.
What the Rule Requires
Under the new rule:
• Quarterly reports must include data on violent crime arrests that did not lead to indictments, cases involving gun discharges under justification defenses, and indictments of peace officers and election-related offenses.
• Annual reports must disclose changes to internal policies, lists of laws requiring external reporting, and detailed accounting of how funds—especially asset forfeiture proceeds and grants—were used.
• Initial reports must retroactively cover prosecutorial actions from January 1, 2021, through the rule’s effective date, unless specific exceptions apply.
• Case files and correspondence—including potentially privileged material—may be requested by the OAG’s Oversight Advisory Committee, which has broad discretion under the rule to review decisions and trends.
Failure to comply may lead to the attorney general deeming a prosecutor’s actions “official misconduct” under Local Government Code §87.011, or pursuing legal remedies such as injunctions or quo warranto proceedings.
Pushback from Prosecutors
The rule faced strong opposition during a public comment period following its initial publication in September 2024. Numerous prosecutors and legal groups argued the rule is politically motivated, an overreach of executive power, and a violation of constitutional principles such as separation of powers and prosecutorial discretion.
Critics also raised concerns about the burden the rule places on local offices, the security and confidentiality of sensitive case materials, and potential legal conflicts over privileged or expunged records.
Some also noted that the rule’s definition of “violent crime” includes offenses like theft and burglary—typically not considered violent—which could skew crime statistics and public perception.
In response, the OAG declined to make significant changes, maintaining that it has legal authority under §41.006 and that the public has a right to know how prosecutors are handling serious criminal matters.
Impact and Enforcement
Despite the controversy, the rule is now law. The OAG asserts the cost to local governments will be minimal and absorbed into existing operations. Entities found to be out of compliance will be publicly listed on the attorney general’s website.
The rule’s Oversight Advisory Committee—comprised of three OAG staff members—will monitor compliance and may request entire case files or waive specific requirements in cases of hardship.
The new reporting structure is part of a broader political and legal effort by Paxton’s office to increase scrutiny on progressive prosecutors who critics say decline to pursue certain crimes or reduce charges as a matter of policy. Opponents argue that local voters—not state officials—should determine prosecutorial priorities.
As of now, counties including Harris, Bexar, Travis, Dallas, Tarrant, and others with populations over 400,000 are subject to the rule.
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 the 772 arrest notifications TCOLE received in 2024..
Or you may find our publishing on a newly elected Texas sheriff’s battle with TCOLE over the accuracy of his personal history statement 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