Changes

During much of his tenure as attorney general, Paxton has been sidetracked by personal legal  matters. He faces a fraud trial in [[Houston, Texas|Houston]] in December 2017 for having allegedly failed to inform those investing in the technology firm Servergy that he was receiving a commission on sales. At the time, Paxton was still a member of the Texas House of Representatives. The case will be presided over by a [[Democratic Party|Democratic]] judge, Robert Johnson.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Texas-AG-Paxton-to-stand-trial-in-December-judge-11549166.php|author=Cindy George and Andrea Zelinski|title=Texas AG Paxton to stand trial in December, judge rules|publisher=''The Houston Chronicle''|date=July 27, 2017|accessdate=October 1, 2017}}</ref> Meanwhile, a Security and Exchange Commission complaint against Paxton has been twice dismissed, most recently in March 2017, on the grounds that the attorney general had "no plausible legal duty" to inform investors that he would earn a commission if they purchased stock in a technical company that Paxton represented.<ref name=december>Andrea Zelinski, "Paxton's SEC charge dismissed: No 'legal duty' to disclose commission," ''San Antonio Express-News'', March 3, 2017, p. A3.</ref>

During much of his tenure as attorney general, Paxton has been sidetracked by personal legal  matters. He faces a fraud trial in [[Houston, Texas|Houston]] in December 2017 for having allegedly failed to inform those investing in the technology firm Servergy that he was receiving a commission on sales. At the time, Paxton was still a member of the Texas House of Representatives. The case will be presided over by a [[Democratic Party|Democratic]] judge, Robert Johnson.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Texas-AG-Paxton-to-stand-trial-in-December-judge-11549166.php|author=Cindy George and Andrea Zelinski|title=Texas AG Paxton to stand trial in December, judge rules|publisher=''The Houston Chronicle''|date=July 27, 2017|accessdate=October 1, 2017}}</ref> Meanwhile, a Security and Exchange Commission complaint against Paxton has been twice dismissed, most recently in March 2017, on the grounds that the attorney general had "no plausible legal duty" to inform investors that he would earn a commission if they purchased stock in a technical company that Paxton represented.<ref name=december>Andrea Zelinski, "Paxton's SEC charge dismissed: No 'legal duty' to disclose commission," ''San Antonio Express-News'', March 3, 2017, p. A3.</ref>

As attorney general, Paxton has fought to keep alive from federal court challenges the state laws requiring proper voter identification, the abolition of [[sanctuary cities]], religious freedom, and the current congressional districting plan, which Democrats claim is [[gerrymander]]ed to favor Republicans. On June 25, 2018, the [[United States Supreme Court]] decided 5-4, that the district lines were drawn in "good faith" n 2013 by Texas state legislators. However, one state House district was invalidated. Democrats claim that the growth of Texas occurs primarily in minority areas, but minorities do not receive equal representation in how legislative lines are drafted.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-upholds-most-texas-election-districts-over-charges-of-racial-discrimination/ar-AAz9uhb?ocid=spartanntp|title=Supreme Court upholds most Texas election districts over charges of racial discrimination|publisher=Msn.com|accessdate=June 25, 2018}}</ref>   

As attorney general, Paxton has fought to keep alive from federal court challenges the state laws requiring proper voter identification, the abolition of [[sanctuary cities]], religious freedom, and the current congressional districting plan, which Democrats claim is [[gerrymander]]ed to favor Republicans. On June 25, 2018, the [[United States Supreme Court]] decided 5–4, that the district lines were drawn in "good faith" in 2013 by Texas state legislators. However, one state House district was invalidated. Democrats claim that the growth of Texas occurs primarily in minority areas, but minorities do not receive equal representation in how legislative lines are drafted.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-upholds-most-texas-election-districts-over-charges-of-racial-discrimination/ar-AAz9uhb?ocid=spartanntp|title=Supreme Court upholds most Texas election districts over charges of racial discrimination|publisher=Msn.com|accessdate=June 25, 2018}}</ref>   

Paxton's trial was scheduled to have begun on December 11, 2017, coincidentally the last day that he could file as a candidate for re-nomination in the Republican primary on March 6, 2018. If convicted, he could face huge fines and 99 years imprisonment.<ref name=december/> However, the trial has yet to begin and may not happen until after the November 6 general election in which Paxton is a candidate for a second term. Before Paxton can face the fraud charges, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the state's highest criminal court, must decide if the prosecutors in the case are being overpaid. After its summer recess, the appeals court will issue an opinion regarding the pay for the prosecutors in September at the earliest. So the Paxton trial could be delayed until 2019.<ref>"Justice Delayed", ''Texas Monthly'', July 3, 2018.</ref>  

Paxton's trial was scheduled to have begun on December 11, 2017, coincidentally the last day that he could file as a candidate for re-nomination in the Republican primary on March 6, 2018. If convicted, he could face huge fines and 99 years imprisonment.<ref name=december/> However, the trial has yet to begin and may not happen until after the November 6 general election in which Paxton is a candidate for a second term. Before Paxton can face the fraud charges, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, the state's highest criminal court, must decide if the prosecutors in the case are being overpaid. After its summer recess, the appeals court will issue an opinion regarding the pay for the prosecutors in September at the earliest. So the Paxton trial could be delayed until 2019.<ref>"Justice Delayed", ''Texas Monthly'', July 3, 2018.</ref>