Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton cannot shut down a Latino-focused voting-rights nonprofit, a federal judge ruled after finding Paxton’s legal bid lacked evidence and appeared to be driven by bad faith.
U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman ruled Thursday that Paxton failed to offer “any plausible proof” that Jolt Initiative violated the law. Pitman halted Paxton’s attempt to continue the state-court case that seeks to revoke the group’s nonprofit charter through a legal mechanism known as a quo warranto petition.
Pitman’s decision addressed Paxton’s central allegation that Jolt submitted “unlawful voter registration applications.” According to the ruling, Paxton’s case against Jolt “supposes absolutely no wrongdoing” and indicates Paxton may be “harassing (Jolt) and fishing for reasons to investigate its organization.”
The judge also described why the state attorney general’s effort warranted federal intervention. The ruling said the court does not reach the conclusion light that Paxton was not acting in good faith after Paxton had multiple opportunities to identify evidence of illegal activity or general wrongdoing but did not do so, the opinion says. Pitman wrote that “The court does not come to this conclusion light,” and added that “Given multiple opportunities to assert his good faith by pointing to any credible evidence of illegal activity or even general wrongdoing … Defendant could not.”
Jolt’s case is part of a wider dispute over voter registration activity and the boundaries between election enforcement and constitutional protections. Jolt lawyers have argued that the state attorney general’s actions infringe rights under the First Amendment and the Voting Rights Act, and they have challenged Paxton’s evidence as well as the motivations behind the legal pursuit.
In court filings, Jolt has argued that the conduct at issue did not violate Texas law because election code allows a person to appoint their parent as “an agent” to “complete and sign a registration application” on the person’s behalf, with conditions tied to whether the parent is a qualified voter or has submitted a registration application and is eligible to vote, the filing said. Pitman agreed there was not evidence of wrongdoing presented by Paxton’s office in the federal proceeding, according to the AP report.
The legal conflict between Paxton’s office and Jolt is not new. The AP report said that last year, Jolt successfully sued to stop the state’s investigation into the group’s voter registration efforts, and the parties have returned to court multiple times over related disputes.
In a statement following Pitman’s ruling, Jolt executive director Jackie Bastard said the organization had faced “a relentless campaign of harassment designed to completely crush our organization and silence our community.” Bastard said the judge’s “finding that AG Paxton acted in bad faith confirms what we have known all along: this was never about election integrity, it was about political retaliation.”
The case also traces back to Paxton’s office inquiries that Jolt says began after unverified claims circulated publicly about voter registration efforts near driver’s license facilities. The AP report said Fox News host Maria Bartiromo posted on X last year that a friend had seen organizations registering migrants to vote outside state drivers license facilities in Fort Worth and Weatherford, and that local officials including the Parker County Republican chair said there was no evidence to support the post.
Paxton’s office later sent an undercover agent to investigate by attempting to register a fake daughter near a DMV location outside San Antonio, according to Paxton’s Oct. 23 court filing cited in the AP report. Paxton’s filing said a Jolt volunteer deputy registrar still instructed the agent on how to register his daughter despite her absence, and it argued that the group’s decision to hold voter registration drives near DMV locations showed an “unlawful motive,” the report said.
The federal judge’s ruling arrives as Texas continues to pursue related questions about noncitizens and voting. Earlier this year, Paxton announced his office is investigating cases of “potential noncitizens” casting more than 200 ballots in 2020 and 2022. The AP report also said Texas counties have looked into more than 2,700 registered voters flagged as “potential noncitizens,” and that at least six of those individuals have been confirmed as U.S. citizens.
Voters in Texas recently also approved a constitutional amendment adding language that a person who is not a U.S. citizen cannot vote in Texas, according to the AP report. The AP said noncitizen voting was already illegal before the update.
Meanwhile, Paxton has continued to frame Jolt as a threat to election integrity. The attorney general said when he filed the state quo warranto suit in Tarrant County that Jolt was a “radical, partisan operation” that had “knowingly attempt[ed] to corrupt our voter rolls” and “weaken the voice of lawful Texas voters,” adding that he would ensure “they face the full force of the law.”