WASHINGTON — The Justice Department quietly decided in the final weeks of the Biden administration not to prosecute Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, effectively ending the corruption investigation that cast a long shadow over the political career of a close ally of President Donald Trump, The Associated Press has learned.
The decision not to bring charges — which has never been publicly reported — resolved the high-stakes federal probe before Trump’s new Justice Department leadership could even take action on an investigation sparked by allegations from Paxton’s inner circle that the Texas Republican abused his office to aid a political donor.
The move came almost two years after the Justice Department’s public integrity section in Washington took over the investigation, removing the case from the hands of federal investigators in Texas who had believed there was sufficient evidence for an indictment.
Two people familiar with the matter, who spoke to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, confirmed the department’s decision to decline to prosecute. Though the date of the decision was not immediately clear, it was made in the final weeks of the President Joe Biden’s presidency, one of the people said.
Politically appointed Justice Department leadership was not involved in the decision, which was recommended by a senior career official who had concerns about prosecutors’ ability to secure a conviction, according to another person briefed on the matter. Political appointees are not typically involved in public integrity section matters to avoid the appearance of political interference.
One of Paxton’s lawyers, Dan Cogdell, told the AP on Wednesday night that he had not been informed by the Justice Department of any decision in the investigation but noted: “I never thought they had a case they could make.”
The Department of Justice declined to comment.
Paxton is weighing a run for the U.S. Senate next year, setting up a potential primary against Republican Sen. John Cornyn, ambitions that reflect his political durability despite spending years under clouds that also included felony securities fraud charges and an investigation by the Texas state bar over his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, which Trump lost to Biden.
The federal investigation had been the most serious inquiry still facing Paxton, who settled the securities fraud case and was acquitted of corruption charges in the Texas Senate in 2023 following a historic impeachment. Paxton agreed last year to pay nearly $300,000 in restitution under a deal to end criminal securities fraud charges over accusations that he duped investors in a tech startup near Dallas.
The allegations against Paxton were stunning in part because of who made them.
Eight of his closest aides reported him to the FBI in 2020, accusing him of bribery and abusing his office to help one of his friends and campaign contributors, Nate Paul, who also employed a woman with whom Paxton acknowledged having had an extramarital affair. The same allegations led to Paxton’s impeachment on articles of bribery and abuse of public trust, but he was acquitted by the Republican-led Texas Senate, where his wife is a senator but did not cast a vote during the trial.
Paul pleaded guilty in January to a federal charge after he was accused of making false statements to banks to obtain more than $170 million in loans.
“After the November election, the DOJ accepted a guilty plea from Nate Paul and is apparently letting Ken Paxton escape justice,” TJ Turner and Tom Nesbitt, attorneys for two of the whistleblowers, said in a statement to the AP. “DOJ clearly let political cowardice impact its decision. The whistleblowers — all strong conservatives — did the right thing and continue to stand by their allegations of Paxton’s criminal conduct.”
The Justice Department’s public integrity section, which oversees public corruption cases, took over the Paxton investigation in 2023. The Justice Department has never publicly explained its decision to recuse the federal prosecutors in west Texas who had been leading the investigation. The move was pushed for by Paxton’s attorneys.
Paxton said last year that he would not contest whistleblowers’ claims in a lawsuit that they were improperly fired for reporting Paxton to the FBI. His push to end the whistleblowers’ lawsuit came as he faced the likelihood of having to sit for a deposition and answer questions under oath.
Paxton has become one Trump’s most loyal supporters and defenders in recent years, and his name had been floated as a contender to lead the Justice Department under Trump’s second term.
Paxton went to court in a show of support last year when Trump stood trial in his New York hush-money case, which ended in a conviction. And he was among several Republican attorneys general who traveled to Washington last month for Trump’s campaign-style speech at the Justice Department in which the president vowed retribution for what he described as the “lies and abuses that have occurred within these walls.”
There had been investigative activity in the corruption probe as late as last August. Aaron Reitz, who was recently confirmed as Trump’s pick to lead the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Policy, was questioned that month before a grand jury about Paxton’s firing of the whistleblowers in 2020, Bloomberg Law reported.
Reitz, who served as a Paxton aide, was asked by members of Congress weighing his Justice Department nomination to detail what he told the grand jury. Reitz declined to answer in a questionnaire sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee in February, stating the federal investigation was ongoing.
“I believe that Attorney General Paxton is innocent and has committed no crimes,” Reitz told the committee.
Grand jury records from 2021 obtained by The Texas Newsroom last year showed that federal authorities were investigating Paxton for several potential crimes, including bribery and witness retaliation. It’s unclear whether the scope or focus of the investigation changed when the public integrity section in Washington took it over.
During Paxton’s impeachment trial, former advisers testified that he pressured them to help the campaign donor, Paul, who was under FBI investigation. The testimony included arguments over who paid for home renovations, whether Paxton used burner phones and how his alleged extramarital affair became a strain on the office. Paxton decried the impeachment effort as a “politically motivated sham.”