Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton isn’t slowing down. From suing city halls to hunting down fleeing lawmakers, Paxton has spent recent months waging what amounts to a one-man legal war across the state — and beyond.
The moves are part of a broader, aggressive enforcement posture that’s defined Paxton’s tenure: challenge local governments, target immigration policies, and use the weight of the AG’s office to reshape how Texas cities operate. Whether you see it as principled enforcement or political theater largely depends on which side of the aisle you’re sitting on. But the lawsuits are real, and they’re piling up fast.
Houston in the Crosshairs
The most headline-grabbing action came on April 16, 2026, when Paxton filed suit against Houston Mayor John Whitmire and several city councilmembers, alleging the city adopted a local ordinance that directly contradicts Texas Senate Bill 4 — a state law requiring local law enforcement to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, specifically ICE. Paxton didn’t mince words. “I will not allow any local official to push sanctuary policies that make our communities less safe,” he said. “Under my watch, no Texas city will be a safe harbor for illegals.”
The statement was vintage Paxton — combative, pointed, and designed to travel. He called on Houston to immediately repeal the ordinance, framing the city’s action not just as a policy disagreement but as an outright constitutional violation. “Houston has no authority to ignore the Constitution and the laws duly enacted by the Legislature,” he said.
Still, cities don’t always roll over. And Houston, with its size and political weight, is unlikely to repeal anything quietly.
A Thousand Cities Under a Microscope
It’s not just Houston. Paxton has launched an investigation into roughly 1,000 Texas cities — including Dallas, Fort Worth, San Antonio, Conroe, Sugar Land, and Galveston — to determine whether they’re complying with Senate Bill 1851, which requires municipalities to publicly post their annual financial audits. The goal, according to Paxton’s office, is to prevent unlawful tax increases from slipping through without public scrutiny.
That’s a wide net. And it signals something important: this isn’t just about immigration. Paxton appears intent on using the AG’s office as a compliance watchdog over virtually every tier of local government in Texas. Whether the investigations lead to actual enforcement actions remains to be seen, but the message to city administrators is clear enough.
The EPIC City Lawsuit
Then there’s the case that drew a different kind of attention. Paxton sued the Double R Municipal Utility District No. 2A, which spans Hunt and Collin Counties, alleging the board evaded state oversight by approving the annexation of more than 402 acres to support a large-scale Islamic development project known as EPIC City, or “The Meadows.” Paxton is seeking to remove board members and have the annexation invalidated entirely.
Critics have raised concerns that the lawsuit — targeting a development tied to an Islamic center — crosses a line from legal enforcement into something more troubling. Paxton’s office has framed it strictly as a matter of procedural compliance and oversight. The courts will ultimately decide which framing holds up.
One Loss in the Win Column
Not everything has gone Paxton’s way. The 15th Court of Appeals rejected his lawsuit against Harris County’s Immigrant Legal Services Fund, a program that’s been running since 2020 and was seeded with $2.5 million in county funds to provide legal aid to undocumented immigrants. Paxton had argued the use of taxpayer money for that purpose was unlawful. The court disagreed.
Harris County Attorney Jonathan Fombonne welcomed the ruling with measured confidence. “This program has operated responsibly for years and continues to serve a legitimate public purpose,” he said. It was a notable setback for the AG’s office, a reminder that aggressive legal strategy doesn’t guarantee courtroom success.
Chasing Lawmakers Across State Lines
Perhaps no episode better captures Paxton’s willingness to push legal boundaries than the effort to pursue 13 Democratic state House members who fled Texas — some to California, others to Illinois — to deny quorum and block a GOP redistricting plan. Paxton filed a lawsuit seeking their removal and pursued civil arrest warrants in both out-of-state courts, an extraordinary and legally contested move that drew national attention.
The gambit was audacious, if nothing else. Whether it set a lasting legal precedent or simply made for compelling cable news is a question legal scholars are still arguing over.
What isn’t in dispute is the pattern. Paxton is using the full machinery of the attorney general’s office — lawsuits, investigations, interstate legal maneuvers — to assert state authority over cities, counties, and even individual legislators. Some of it will stick. Some of it already hasn’t. But the cumulative effect is a state government that’s made very clear it intends to fight, in court and in public, over who ultimately controls Texas.
As one veteran Texas political observer put it: the AG’s office used to be where legal disputes went to get resolved. Under Paxton, it’s where they go to get started.
