Texas “Attorney General” Ken Paxton (R) went on NewsNation’s On Balance With Leland Vittert last Friday on the day the radical right SCOTUS overturned both Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

Speaking to former Fox host Leland Vittert on NewsNation, Paxton endorsed punishing companies that provide employees with assistance for abortion services. Also, he defended Clarence Thomas’s heinously out-of-touch concurrence in Dobbs suggesting that Griswold v. Connecticut, Lawrence v. Texas, and Obergefell v. Hodges be struck down as well by supporting the enforcement of the state’s dormant sodomy ban should it be ruled constitutional to do so.

Joshua Eferighe and Leland Vittert at NewsNation Now:

(NewsNation) — Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade case Friday, effectively ending federal constitutional protections for abortion, progressive prosecutors around the country are declaring they won’t enforce the new ruling.


During Friday’s edition of “On Balance With Leland Vittert,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who created an annual holiday to celebrate the historic decision, explained what he and his state will do should he run into that problem.

“I have the opportunity to impose some of the civil penalties. The minimum penalty is $100,000 and it can go up to an unlimited amount,” Paxton said.

“So we will be pursuing the civil side of this,” he added. “The legislature is going to have to decide what they’re going to do with district attorneys as it relates to this issue and really almost every other issue, because the local DA is now becoming a law unto themselves in Texas making their decisions.”

Like progressive DAs, companies, too, are now saying they will pay as part of their medical benefits for people to go to another state for an abortion procedure.

Trudy Ring at The Advocate:

If Texas passes a law banning same-sex intimacy, Attorney General Ken Paxton would be “willing and able” to defend it in court, he told a talk show host over the weekend, and he implied he’d challenge other hard-won rights..

Paxton’s comment comes after U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, in a concurring opinion when the court overturned Roe v. Wade, said the justices should revisit Lawrence v. Texas, the ruling that invalidated state antisodomy laws across the nation; Obergefell v. Hodges, which established nationwide marriage equality; and Griswold v. Connecticut, which struck down state restrictions on contraception. It would take a case coming to the high court for this to happen, but Paxton, a far-right Republican, indicated he would get one started.

“Would you, as attorney general, be comfortable defending a law that once again outlawed sodomy? That questioned Lawrence again or Griswold or gay marriage that came from the state legislature to put to the test what Justice Thomas said?” Leland Vittert, an anchor on the NewsNation cable network, asked Paxton.


He added, “Look, my job is to defend state law, and I’ll continue to do that. That is my job under the Constitution, and I’m certainly willing and able to do that.” He said he’d have to see the actual legislation, but “ultimately, if it’s constitutional, we’re going to go defend it.”

Maggie Baska at Pink News:

Paxton said during an appearance on NewsNation if he would “feel comfortable defending a law that once again outlawed sodomy” in the wake of Thomas’ concurring opinion.

“Yeah I mean, there’s all kinds of issues here. But certainly, the Supreme Court has stepped into issues that I don’t think there was any constitutional provision dealing with,” Paxton said. “They were legislative issues, and this is one of those issues and there may be more.”

The NewsNation host then point-blank asked Paxton: “You wouldn’t rule out that if the state legislature passed the exact same law that Lawrence overturned on sodomy, you wouldn’t have any problem then defending that and taking that case back to the Supreme Court?”

“Yeah look, my job is to defend the state law, and I’ll continue to do that,” the Texas attorney general replied. “That is my job under the Constitution, and I’m certainly willing and able to do that.”

From the 06.24.2022 edition of NewsNation’s On Balance With Leland Vittert:

Liked it? Take a second to support Community on Patreon!

This is a Creative Commons article. The original version of this article appeared here.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here