Last updated Oct. 13, 2026
Ken Paxton FilesTexas’s attorney general, on the record
KPF-005 Personal finances and legal trouble Dismissed

The State Bar of Texas sued Paxton for professional misconduct over his 2020 election lawsuit

The State Bar charged in 2022 that Paxton’s lawsuit to overturn the 2020 results in four states included dishonest statements and was filed in bad faith. Two courts let the case go forward. It ended in 2025 only after the Texas Supreme Court ruled that the attorney general’s office could not be disciplined this way, not because the charges were disproved.

StatusDismissed
Event period2022–2025
Latest developmentFeb. 14, 2025

What happened

In May 2022, the State Bar’s Commission for Lawyer Discipline sued Paxton in Collin County. It alleged that his December 2020 lawsuit challenging the 2020 results in four states (Texas v. Pennsylvania) contained dishonest statements and was brought in bad faith. Possible sanctions ranged from a private reprimand to disbarment. 01 02

The trial court let the case proceed. In April 2024 a divided Fifth Court of Appeals panel in Dallas ruled 2–1 that it could continue, and Paxton asked the Texas Supreme Court to intervene. 03

On Dec. 31, 2024, the Texas Supreme Court threw out a nearly identical case against First Assistant Attorney General Brent Webster, holding that it violated the separation of powers. 04 The bar then moved to drop its case against Paxton, and on Feb. 14, 2025, the court dismissed it as moot. 01

Why it matters

The state agency that polices lawyers’ ethics concluded that Paxton’s own filings warranted discipline. The case was never decided on the facts; it was ended by a ruling that shields the attorney general’s office from this kind of discipline. 01 04

Timeline

  • May 2022
    State Bar files professional-misconduct suit against Paxton over the 2020 election lawsuit
  • April 2024
    Appeals court lets the misconduct case against Paxton proceed
  • Feb. 14, 2025
    State Bar case ends only after the Texas Supreme Court shields the attorney general’s office

What the sources show

The bar’s claims of misrepresentation and bad faith were allegations that no court decided on the merits. The courts ruled only on whether the case could go forward. The trial court and the Fifth Court of Appeals said it could; the Texas Supreme Court’s Webster ruling effectively ended it. No finding of misconduct and no sanction was ever made. 01 03 04

Relevant response

Paxton’s response

Paxton argued the State Bar had no power to discipline him for his office’s court filings. 03

Response date — June 4, 2024Last checked — Sept. 24, 2026

Sources

  1. 01Reporting
  2. 02Reporting
  3. 03Reporting
  4. 04Reporting

Updates and corrections

  • Sept. 24, 2026
    Case file published.