A proposal to amend the Texas Constitution and restore the state attorney general’s authority to prosecute election-related crimes is set to take center stage during a special legislative session beginning July 21. Governor Greg Abbott has placed the measure — House Joint Resolution (HJR) 7 — on the Legislature’s priority agenda, setting the stage for a high-profile debate over voting rights, local control, and the reach of state government.
Introduced on July 14 by State Rep. David Spiller (R-Jacksboro), HJR 7 aims to give the attorney general “concurrent jurisdiction” to pursue election law violations, a power stripped away in a 2021 ruling by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
“Texans deserve secure and transparent elections — and that starts with strong enforcement,” Spiller wrote in a Facebook post announcing the resolution.
The Court Ruling That Sparked the Fight
At the heart of the issue is a 2021 decision by the Court of Criminal Appeals — the state’s highest court for criminal matters — which ruled 8 to 1 that a 2003 law giving the attorney general authority to prosecute election crimes was unconstitutional. The court concluded that only locally elected district attorneys, not statewide officials, have the power to bring criminal charges.
The case stemmed from a dispute involving then-Jefferson County Sheriff Zena Collins Stephens, who was accused of campaign finance violations. When the local district attorney declined to prosecute, the case was referred to Attorney General Ken Paxton, who pursued the charges under the 2003 statute. But the court later struck that law down, saying it violated the separation of powers in the Texas Constitution.
Since then, Paxton and other Republicans have repeatedly criticized the decision, saying it allows politically motivated local prosecutors to ignore suspected voter fraud cases.
Paxton’s Political Push
Paxton has not only called for a legislative fix, but also taken political aim at the judges who ruled against him. Three of the eight judges who voted to limit his office’s authority lost their seats in the 2024 Republican primary after Paxton endorsed their challengers. In a recent press release, Paxton claimed the court “wrongly overturned more than 70 years of Texas election law” and “opened the door for abuse throughout the state.”
Speaking to conservative media earlier this month, Paxton said voter fraud is “the most important issue,” asserting that “every other issue falls on whether we can elect the right people.”
Under HJR 7, the attorney general would no longer need a local district attorney’s cooperation to bring charges related to election law. Instead, the attorney general and local prosecutors would share that authority equally.
Support and Opposition
Supporters of the amendment say it will close loopholes and ensure that violations of election law are not swept under the rug for political reasons.
Opponents, however, argue the measure is a power grab that threatens local control and politicizes election oversight.
Ashley Harris, a staff attorney for the ACLU of Texas, said in a statement that HJR 7 is “an attempt to control not only local prosecutors, but also election offices,” warning that it could have a chilling effect on election officials and voters alike.
“This is part of a broader trend of centralizing power in Austin,” Harris added, “at the expense of community-level decision-making and accountability.”
What’s Next?
The proposed amendment must receive support from at least two-thirds of both the Texas House and Senate during the special session before it can be placed on the ballot. If it passes, Texas voters will decide the issue in a statewide election on May 2, 2026.
With Governor Abbott backing the amendment and Republican leaders in control of both legislative chambers, HJR 7 is expected to move quickly. But the debate over who should have the final say in prosecuting election crimes — the state’s top lawyer or local officials — is sure to spark intense discussion both inside and outside the Capitol.
