I've been away from Daily Kos for most of the weekend, so I haven't had any time to comment on the big news coming out of Texas on Friday evening. As a criminal defense lawyer here in Texas, I thought I'd throw in some insights about this case.
Just what is Rick Perry charged with?
Two counts: one count of abuse of official capacity -- a first-degree felony (that's 5 to 99 years in prison) when the amount of government property misused is over $200,000 (as is alleged here), and one count of coercion of a public servant, a third-degree felony (2 to 10 years.)
Now, obviously, being indicted is not the same thing as being convicted -- a grand jury saw enough evidence to establish probable cause, but that doesn't mean he's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and based on what I know about the case both counts will be difficult to prove.
So just what are the allegations?
The basis for the allegations stemmed out of Travis County DA Rosemary Lehmberg's drunk-driving arrest back in April 2013. Lehmberg plead guilty and was sentenced to jail time and a fine. Rick Perry demanded that she resign, and threaten to withhold funding from the Public Integrity Unit -- a division of the Travis County DA's office that is charged with investigating and prosecuting state officials and lawmakers -- if she did not resign. She did not resign, and Perry followed up by vetoing state funding for the unit.
Now, even if Rick Perry is not guilty of a crime here, the optics of all this are pretty bad, particularly when you consider that:
1. Perry never, to my recollection, demanded a resignation from former Cameron County DA Armando Villalobos, whose crimes were far worse than drunk driving (short version: he was on the take; use Google if you want the longer version.)
2. Lehmberg's office is in charge of investigating ethics violations by state officials and lawmakers (like, say, I don't know, Rick Perry.)
3. Were Lehmberg to resign, Perry would be allowed to appoint a replacement to serve until the next regularly-scheduled election -- long enough for the Governor to serve out his term in peace.
So you can kind of figure out why Perry really wanted Lehmberg to resign (so that he could have a friendly face watching over ethics shenanigans in Austin) -- and also, you can probably figure out why Lehmberg didn't resign (didn't want the fox guarding the hen house, so to speak.) You can also see that Perry doesn't really care about "integrity" when the DA in question is of no particular consequence to the Governor, regardless of how much the DA's offenses go to the heart of public confidence in the justice system.
Now, once again, it's rather questionable whether Perry's conduct fits the criminal statutes he's been charged under. Sec. 39.02 of the Texas Penal Code (abuse of official capacity) requires that an official "misuses government property ... that has come into the public servant's custody or possession by virtue of the public servant's office or employment," and you can tell just from reading that that it's really questionable that a crime has been committed under that statute. Sec. 36.03 (coercion of public servant) has a built-in exception if the action that influences or attempts to influence the public servant is an official action taken by a member of the governing body. Issuing a veto likely qualifies, though in combination with the resignation demands and threats to withhold funding if the resignation demand is not met... maybe. But it's pretty iffy, and if Rick has a competent defense lawyer (hint: he probably does) then he's probably not getting convicted here.
What about Republicans complaining that this indictment is all political?
I think the guys suing the President doth complain too much.
In all seriousness, though, other than maybe the watchdog group that filed the initial ethics complaint, the judge who handled the complaint is a Republican. The special prosecutor appointed was a former federal prosecutor under H.W. Bush. Since it's Texas, a good portion of the grand jury that issued the indictment are probably Republicans. Contrary to popular belief, at every step of the way have been Republicans who could have acted as a check on whatever Democrats might have an ax to grind with Perry -- and none of them chose to put a stop to it. The special prosecutor thought there was enough probable cause to seek an indictment, and the grand jury thought there was enough probable cause to indict. What does all of that tell you? Even some Republicans apparently cried foul over a quite blatant attempted power grab by the Governor.
What effect will this have on Rick Perry's chances in 2016?
LOL. Next question...
Will this have any effect on Texas's elections in 2014?
Now... this is a difficult question to answer.
It's incredibly unlikely that the Republicans' statewide slate will be caught up in this. None of them are really at all close to Perry. But it does kind of get to a theme in the 2014 elections. Lately, Wendy Davis has been kinda-sorta making up ground in the Governor's race, and while there are probably numerous reasons for that, one reason I think that hasn't been getting a lot of airplay is that Rick Perry's approval ratings have been in the tank for a while now, and as far as I can tell there really isn't a whole lot of difference between Perry and Greg Abbott. (Okay, Abbott is smarter than Perry, and the only reason I can say this with any degree of certainty is that Abbott has a degree from Vanderbilt.) But basically, I suspect that voters are starting to notice that if you disapprove of Perry, Abbott's going to be more of the same, and why would you like more of something you don't like? And it's really the same with the rest of the ballot: if you don't like Perry and these guys are more of the same, anything new that might cause more people to dislike Perry can only help Democrats.
Or, this could have no effect at all. We shall see. A lot depends, of course, on whether this lingers until Election Day. If Republicans somehow manage to get this story to go away, it's obviously not going to have any effect on the races.