Texas AG Paxton sues five cities, including Austin and San Marcos, over marijuana policies | KEYE
cbsaustin.com
TX AG Paxton sues 5 cities over ordinances reducing low-level marijuana possession enforcement.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed lawsuits against five cities – Austin, San Marcos, Killeen, Denton and Elgin – ordinances that aim to eliminate enforcement of low-level marijuana possession offenses.

Paxton alleges the cities’ actions violate state law and the Texas constitution. The lawsuits ask the courts to declare the ordinances void and order the cities to fully enforce state drug laws.

The ordinances were passed after being approved by voters in local ballot propositions. They prohibit police from making arrests or issuing citations for misdemeanor marijuana possession in most cases.

However, Paxton argues the Texas Local Government Code forbids cities from adopting policies not to fully enforce drug laws. He also says the ordinances violate a section of the Texas Constitution stating that city ordinances cannot conflict with state law.

  • @thesmokingman@programming.dev
    9•10 months ago

    Something that’s really important to understand about Republicans in Texas is they believe in small government so long as it’s their government. In theory, city and county governments should supersede state policy in the same way state policy should supersede federal policy per their defenses. However, that only works so long as city and county policy are in lockstep with state policy. Travis County and Austin almost always have some suit coming from Paxton. All of their was made super evident during 2020 COVID when the state wanted cities to decide things unless you were in Bexar (San Antonio), Travis (Austin), and a few others because those counties took COVID seriously based on their data. Here’s an early escalation where Paxton makes it very clear that the only authority cities have comes from the state executive.

    • @beardown@lemm.ee
      5•10 months ago

      They believe they should be able to do whatever they want, and the law should protect them. They make small government or large government arguments as necessary to achieve that goal. There is no integrity here, so we shouldn’t look for it. And we shouldn’t act like pointing out their hypocrisy is productive or will persuade them - they’re aware of their contradictions and they don’t care