Michelle Slaughter is too dangerous to be on the Court of Criminal Appeals. Let me explain why. Slaughter is campaigning on a slogan that “her hands are tied” in relation to the now infamous Stephens decision. Her campaign is based on convincing the “grassroots” through repetition that she is a “constitutional conservative and originalist judge.” In reality, she is a dangerous activist judge posing as a constitutional conservative, originalist.

By now, you have heard of the Stephens decision. On December 15, 2021, two days after the December 13 filing deadline, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals issued a decision in the Stephens case, which stripped Attorney General Ken Paxton’s ability to prosecute election fraud cases in Texas. Slaughter joined in this decision.

What was the Stephens case about? The Federal Bureau of Investigation uncovered potential campaign finance law violations by Jefferson County Sheriff Zena Stephens, a democrat. The FBI passed the investigation to the Texas Rangers who presented the case to Jefferson County District Attorney Bob Wortham, a democrat. Wortham referred the Texas Rangers to the Texas Attorney General’s Office who presented the case to a Chambers County grand jury, which indicted Stephens on three counts: one count of tampering with a government record (Texas Penal Code section 37.10) [reporting a $5,000 campaign contribution in the $50 or less section of a campaign finance report] and two counts of unlawfully making or accepting an illegal campaign contribution (Texas Election Code section 253.033(a)) [accepting cash contributions in excess of $100 from two different individuals]. Stephens challenged the authority of the Texas Attorney General’s Office to prosecute crimes found in the Texas Penal Code.

In 1951, the Texas Legislature assigned the right to original criminal prosecutions for election violations to the Attorney General. The law emphasized the state’s desire to maintain lawful elections. In 2021, the Texas Legislature revised Texas election laws and incorporated the Texas Attorney General as the enforcement centerpiece in the Election Integrity Protection Act of 2021.

Two days after the 2022 primary filing deadline [December 13, 2021], Slaughter joined the majority on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and gave Stephens more than she asked for – holding that the Texas Attorney General has no original authority to prosecute anything. Immediately, grassroots activists took action. Multiple friend of the court briefs were submitted to the court. The State Republican Executive Committee condemned the decision. Said simply, the Stephens decision put election integrity at greater risk. The State immediately filed a motion for rehearing.

Nine months later, on the motion for rehearing, Slaughter issued an dissenting opinion stating that she would grant a rehearing and request briefing on an issue of “possible construction of the statute” that no party addressed. Court watchers and grassroots activists were horrified by Slaughter’s dissent – primarily footnote six. Slaughter’s opinions and social media posts are not befitting a justice of the peace, much less a judge on the highest criminal court in Texas. Meanwhile, Slaughter + friends have left Texans in a position of not being able to defend against election fraud.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted review of Stephens on February 10, 2021. The case was submitted to the court on June 16, 2021, which means that it was ready to be decided. The court waited until December 15 to issue the decision. This was intentional. This was activism. This caused the dismissal of hundreds of voter fraud cases across Texas.

Slaughter is on the campaign trail now and made a stop at the Downtown Pachyderm. I had a few questions.

Slaughter’s presentation was all about how her hands are “tied” because the Texas Constitution mandates that she strip Ken Paxton of his original prosecutorial authority. Remember: Slaughter claims to be an originalist.

After Slaughter’s repetitive presentation, I asked Slaughter how she found it acceptable under Article I, Section 10 of the Texas Constitution (right to an impartial jury) to send Paxton’s bogus criminal cases from deep red Collin County to deep blue Harris County. Her response was to repeat her originalist mantra. It sounded like she was repeating a message from the impeachment managers.

There is no way in the world that the Texas Constitution makes it okay to send a criminal case from Collin County to Harris County and force Paxton to face a sea of blue at trial. Slaughter should practice common sense.

Then, I asked Slaughter about the origination of the idea to strip Paxton of his prosecutorial authority. She ducked and dodged this question. Maybe it was the $5,000 that she received from Rusty “Resty” Hardin on December 26, 2023 (yes, after the impeachment trial) or the $15,000 that she received from Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC (yes, immediately after the impeachment trial). Rest assured, Slaughter is the choice of the impeachment manager class. Maybe before the election cycle is over she will take some money from the Arnolds.

By now, it should be clear that Slaughter is simply too dangerous to serve on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.