Texas AG runoff: Democrats Jaworski and Johnson on Trump battles, legal strategy, and office priorities

Jaworski

Affordability — I will create and staff within the OAG a Division of Affordability focused on using the law to help young adult Texans afford the American Dream (graduating debt free, getting a job that pays good wages, home ownership or affordable rent and starting a family).

Elections — I will create a Division of Elections and Voter Encouragement to enforce the law and seek to register every high school senior, pursuant to Election Code section 13.046d , to reverse decades of voter suppression wrought by Texas GOP politicians.

Corruption — I will create a Division of Ethics and Integrity which will investigate — and with local district attorneys will take punitive action to respond to — credible complaints of fraud, corruption and crime within Texas government. The Texas AG DEI will also advocate for constitutional amendments and laws providing for term limits, campaign contribution limits, independent redistricting commissions and citizen-initiated legislation by petition.

Johnson

My top priority will be to rebuild the OAG – in talent, purpose, culture, and ethic, and to re-commit the agency to serving the public interest instead of a partisan faction’s personal and political aims. The OAG has too many essential functions to reasonably rank them, but generally speaking, the office should confront a set of major problems that are getting worse by the day: (1) uncompetitive markets that drive up prices and encourage deceptive practices, that drive down quality and stifle innovation, and that sap the bargaining power of consumers and workers; (2) problematic levels of influence of commercial power over public policy, the natural outgrowth of which is corruption; (3) loss of respect for the rule of law, constitutional order, and democratic institutions at a state and national level, and (4) an antagonistic relationship with local district attorneys that impairs their ability to keep the public safe.

Jaworski

The agency has over 4,000 employees, and many are nonpartisan, valued state workers. As attorney general-elect, I will reach out to each to determine their willingness and capabilities to serve going forward. My incoming chief of staff and I will identify within a week of the Nov. 3, midterm election the numerous political apparatchiks installed by Paxton, and more likely than not, they will leave on their own. But if they don’t, we will make it clear within legal parameters their last day is Paxton’s last day.

Johnson

Anyone working for Paxton in pursuit of a partisan ideological agenda will need to look for work somewhere else; I expect that will mean the exit of most, perhaps all, of the top echelon. That does not mean I will administer partisan ideological purity tests – I will not. Disagreement is okay, agendas are not. Moreover, I am certain that many of the OAG’s 4,000 employees are not especially ideological, and have institutional knowledge, professional expertise, and a personal commitment to public service that will be essential for the office to operate effectively. I will invite them to re-apply. The proportion that stays or goes depends on what we find when we get there.

Jaworski

It would be hostile, and within the rules of decorum for federal and state litigation. Over the course of my thirty-five-year legal career trying cases in courts across the country, I’ve dealt with people like Trump and his minions, and there is only one way to deal with them: nose to nose and ten toes down.

Johnson

Rough. Were I attorney general in 2025, I would already have sued the Trump administration many times for violating the law and the Constitution and harming Texans in the process. Texas has been deprived of money and sovereign power by the blind subservience of the current OAG to Washington.

But the relationship would not be antagonistic out of spite, nor for partisan theatrics. While I won’t hesitate to sue the Trump administration (or any other), I’ll work in partnership wherever it benefits the state and is consistent with the law and the scope of my authority. This approach – working without regard to partisan affiliation or political pressures while adhering to principle – is what has allowed me to pass 135 bills as a Democrat in the Texas Senate while still advancing Democratic values through my own legislation and consistent opposition to the current Republican bent toward expansive, regressive government.

Jaworski

The credibility of the Office of the Attorney General has withered, and the agency has been corrupted under Paxton’s tenure. There is absolutely nothing to carry forward from his years in office. Perhaps we can have a small museum dedicated to Paxton’s ruinous years in office within the William P. Clements State Office Building so future generations of school children who come to Austin as part of their Texas history field trip can understand how corruption in government is corrosive to the rule of law and American values.

Johnson

Antitrust enforcement and consumer protection. But I’d enhance it, and I would rely less on outside counsel (see below). Some people in Paxton’s OAG have taken seriously the responsibility to act as a check on the unlawful practices and market-distorting concentration of commercial power. Very recently, the Texas OAG has succeeded in altering behavior by hotels that had been unlawfully charging junk fees. It should be recognized that this kind of litigation can itself spur helpful legislation. (I personally have filed legislation to combat junk fees in other industries.) Paxton has been criticized, however, for pursuing these worthy aims with a bias against, ironically, smaller businesses. I would recruit a top flight team of attorneys and policy experts and combine resources and expertise with other AGs around the country (irrespective of political party) to elevate this aspect of the OAG responsibilities, without bias.

Jaworski

Yes they do. It’s called the rule of law. A creative, talented, ethical lawyer understands that. Political hacks … not so much.

Johnson

Part of the reason I’m running for this office is to reverse the accelerating disintegration of respect for the rule of law and separation of powers under the leadership of scofflaws like Ken Paxton and Donald Trump, and at times even under former-AG-now-Gov. Greg Abbott. In the instances where I believe that a case was wrongly decided (it will happen!), I will on behalf of the state appeal the ruling, and where appropriate seek a stay of (a pause on) the lower court ruling. But absent a stay, the state should honor the rule of law by complying with judicial rulings.

Jaworski

No. The Texas attorney general, with some clearly defined statutory exceptions, is a civil law authority, and it needs to stay that way. On those limited occasions when criminal justice matters arise, a Texas attorney general who is doing his job will make sure to have solid relationships with local district attorneys across the state to advance any agenda involving criminal justice. That’s not just me saying that — it’s what the Texas Constitution requires. Of course, what I’ve just described can happen only when a Democrat is elected as our next attorney general, because Republicans have irretrievably abandoned their once-solid support for local decision-making authority.

Johnson

It’s important to recognize that under current law, the Legislature cannot, merely by passing a bill, grant to the attorney general prosecutorial authority that the Texas Constitution expressly assigns to district attorneys. So we have to consider whether expansion of authority requires a constitutional amendment rather than the typical Republican tack of ramming another hollow talking point through the Legislature.

The next question is whether now is the right time to expand AG powers. Some other states grant more criminal authority to the OAG. But Ken Paxton’s grotesquely partisan weaponization of AG powers, at a time when Donald Trump brazenly weaponizes the Department of Justice, should give us pause.

A better approach would be to use current AG powers and resources more effectively to support investigations and prosecutions by district and county attorneys, where, not incidentally, the Constitution places prosecutorial authority subject to election by the voters.

Jaworski

Yes, with the limited exception of those matters where the Texas attorney general (who, by historical practice, is a licensed Texas lawyer, even if that’s not a constitutional requirement) adheres, as he must, to Rule 3.01 of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct: “A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless the lawyer reasonably believes that there is a basis for doing so that is not frivolous.”

Johnson

The state Constitution and Texas Government Code section 402.021 explicitly assign to the AG the duty to represent the state in the Texas Supreme Court and all (lower) courts of appeal. Representing the state includes representing state agencies. Historically, attorneys general have declined on occasion to represent an agency, but the practice is suspect. If the AG does decline representation (perhaps due to a conflict), the AG must approve of outside counsel for the agency. The AG cannot simply leave the agency without representation.

I will fulfill the duties of the office in accordance with the oath I will take, which includes the discretionary exercise of my independent legal judgment in presenting the position of the state in any dispute with an agency.

Jaworski

I would not defend laws and executive actions that I reasonably believe are unconstitutional or the product of corruption in government. There are many such examples — a few recent ones are the 89th Legislature’s Ten Commandments law, Greg Abbott’s sending the Texas National Guard to Chicago and the voucher bill passed by the second special session of the 89th Legislature. There are many more.

Johnson

I believe in carrying out the responsibilities of the office, which includes defending laws I may dislike. Representing the state, however, does not necessarily mean or require adopting a statutory interpretation favored by the governor or by the Legislature. And it certainly does not mean or require taking the position that an unconstitutional law is not unconstitutional, nor that a statutory conflict among laws or even within a law must be resolved in a partisan manner that pleases Republican leadership.

Jaworski

I would not continue “that practice.” Paxton has chased off national level class talent from the Texas OAG with his notorious conduct, and he has a habit of hiring competent law firms, awarding handsome contingent fees contracts and then, curiously, OAG staff then wind up working at these firms. I would draft and recruit excellent trial attorneys to serve Texas and replenish the consumer protection and other divisions (new and existing) so we can try our own cases, win verdicts, collect judgments — all without having to pay 40% on everything we win. I can imagine there will be occasion to hire great lawyers, but on those occasions, I will — unlike Paxton — scrupulously adhere to the rules pertaining to the retention of outside counsel set forth in Texas Government Code section 2254.103(d) .

Johnson

Not at the same level. There may and likely will be instances where a particular firm or group of attorneys has expertise that is worth engaging. But I will recruit (and retain!) top-flight lawyers and expert staff at the OAG, and the need to outsource or reinforce in-house capabilities will be exceptional, not routine. Taxpayers will not have to pay $3,780/hour for excellent and effective legal representation against Trump’s ballroom contributors or any other corporate behemoth.

In massive cases that require massive resources, AGs from multiple states frequently combine forces successfully. Also, the terms of representation must not incentivize a quick eye-popping settlement (Big Tech/pharmaceutical money is so vast in scale that it can be as hard to fathom as astronomical measures) over meaningful change in market behavior. A big settlement number gets headlines, but consumers are protected when the harmful behavior stops.

Jaworski

I do not agree with Ken Paxton’s “hide the records from public scrutiny” default approach. As attorney general, I will embrace a level of transparency that will be historical in Texas government, and when interpreting the Texas Open Records and Open Meetings Acts, I will honor the intent of the “Government in the Sunshine Act” movement that followed the Watergate scandal.

Johnson

Paxton appears to have a history of interpreting open records laws narrowly when he or other Republican leaders want to hide information from public view, and broadly when he wants information to advance his right-wing narrative. The “transparency” in his approach to public information access is one-way.

I would apply the law consistently and without bias, and work within the bounds of the law to ensure public access to public information. As a state senator, I have filed seven bills aimed at making government offices more responsive to public information requests (and passed one of them).