At a recent debate featuring the four Republican candidates seeking to become Texas’ next attorney general, the contenders largely aligned on core conservative priorities while attempting to distinguish themselves through experience, tone, and strategy. With incumbent Ken Paxton not seeking reelection, the primary marks the first open Republican contest for the office in more than a decade, drawing heightened attention from both state and national observers.
The candidates — U.S. Rep. Chip Roy, state Sen. Joan Huffman, state Sen. Mayes Middleton, and former Paxton deputy Aaron Reitz — presented largely similar ideological positions during the debate. Each emphasized conservative legal activism and pledged to continue using the attorney general’s office as a vehicle for advancing Republican policy priorities through litigation and enforcement.
Among the shared themes were calls to challenge what they described as the growing influence of Islamic institutions in Texas, pursue greater state authority over immigration enforcement, and prevent the distribution of abortion medication within state lines. These positions reflected a continuation of strategies employed during Paxton’s tenure, which transformed the office into a central player in national legal battles tied to conservative policy objectives.
Despite broad agreement on major issues, the candidates sought to differentiate themselves in approach and background. Roy, widely viewed as the early frontrunner, received the bulk of criticism from his opponents. His challengers appear focused on preventing him from securing a majority in the primary, which would trigger a runoff election between the top two vote-getters.
Roy, now serving his fourth term in Congress, previously held roles as chief of staff to U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz and as a senior deputy in the attorney general’s office during Paxton’s early years. Reitz, who also worked under Paxton and has secured his endorsement, questioned Roy’s effectiveness during that earlier tenure. Roy rejected those criticisms and instead highlighted his support from Cruz, pointing to the senator’s legal background and familiarity with the office’s responsibilities.
Another point of contention centered on Roy’s past resistance to federal legislation that would have criminalized hormone therapy for minors. Roy had expressed concern that such a law could grant excessive authority to the federal government over states. Middleton and Reitz challenged that reasoning, arguing that state protections should take precedence. Roy responded by emphasizing his broader commitment to limiting federal overreach, even when aligned with policies favored by fellow Republicans.
Roy’s emphasis on independence has been a recurring feature of his political career. Although he frequently supports the broader Republican agenda, he has also broken with party leadership on issues involving constitutional authority and states’ rights. During the debate, he reiterated that his approach would prioritize Texas sovereignty regardless of which party controls the White House.
Huffman echoed that sentiment in more measured terms. Drawing on decades of experience as a prosecutor, judge, and legislator, she framed herself as a pragmatic alternative to what she characterized as overly aggressive campaign rhetoric. Huffman suggested that certain promises made by her rivals — particularly regarding the removal of local prosecutors seen as ideologically opposed — might be more complex to implement than presented.
Her comments drew criticism from Reitz, who characterized a cautious approach as insufficiently assertive. Huffman countered by questioning why such actions had not already been taken if they were as straightforward as suggested.
Middleton, an oil and gas executive and significant Republican donor, has emerged as a formidable contender in part due to his substantial personal financial investment in the race. Having committed nearly $12 million of his own funds, Middleton has positioned himself as one of the Legislature’s most consistently conservative voices. His campaign branding emphasizes alignment with the populist wing of the Republican Party, and recent polling indicates that his advertising has helped elevate his standing in the contest.
However, Middleton’s limited legal background became a focal point during the debate. Opponents highlighted his lack of courtroom experience, questioning whether his professional history would adequately prepare him to oversee a complex legal office responsible for representing the state in major litigation.
The significance of the race extends beyond Texas. Over the past decade, the attorney general’s office has played an outsized role in shaping national legal debates, particularly through multi-state lawsuits and constitutional challenges. As a result, political observers across the country are closely watching the outcome.
The debate itself was hosted by the Republican Attorneys General Association in partnership with Blaze Media, and was attended by several sitting Republican attorneys general from other states. Their presence underscored the national implications of the race and the influence the Texas office has wielded in recent years.
In a statement released alongside the event, RAGA Executive Director Adam Piper highlighted the institutional legacy established by Paxton and his predecessors, including Gov. Greg Abbott and Sen. John Cornyn. Piper noted that the next attorney general would inherit an office with both local responsibilities and a prominent role in national legal strategy.
The debate took place as early voting began across Texas, with ballots available through Feb. 27 ahead of the March 3 primary election. If no candidate secures more than 50 percent of the vote, the top two finishers will advance to a runoff scheduled for late May.
On the Democratic side, three candidates are competing for their party’s nomination. While the general election remains months away, historical trends suggest a challenging path for Democrats in statewide contests. No Democrat has won statewide office in Texas since 1994, making the Republican primary the most consequential stage of the race.
As the campaign moves forward, the candidates are expected to continue refining their messages in an effort to appeal to a conservative electorate that broadly agrees on policy direction but may weigh leadership style, legal expertise, and political independence in determining the next steward of one of the state’s most influential offices.
