It was quite the show at the House Select Committee on Governmental Oversight hearing this week. We have much to unpack, including a lawmaker pulling out his gun and showing it off to make a point during the committee meeting. No time to waste—let’s get to it.
The Charge
The Committee was charged with examining whether outside non-governmental organizations, donors, and consultants exert undue influence over local prosecutorial policies and individual case determinations. Lawmakers were supposed to evaluate the impact of these external partnerships on prosecutorial independence and public safety as well as identify any ethical concerns. However, lawmakers are always able to order off the menu.
Most interim hearings are designed to evaluate issues or problems that concern Texans and then create solutions for the legislative session. This interim hearing had a solution in mind and was more about identifying the problem that would justify the solution. That was evident from the press statement by Texas leadership issued directly prior to the hearing in which the Governor stated that his statewide prosecutor proposal would solve all the issues with rogue prosecutors. Since the hearing, Governor Greg Abbott continues to post on his social media channels about his proposed statewide prosecutor and how such an office would “crack down on crime the locals refuse to prosecute”. Speaker Dustin Burrows also posted his thoughts on the outcome of the hearing. Also, the fact that only the elected prosecutors from Travis County were invited and most witnesses were there to air their grievances with that particular county gives credence to the theory that this show was produced with a very specific audience in mind.
The Hearing
The opening panel of crime victims set up the adversarial tone for the entire hearing. Their testimony triggered Representative Mitch Little (R-Lewisville) to start a conversation with the other lawmakers about issuing a subpoena to compel Travis County District Attorney José Garza to testify at the hearing. Travis County Attorney Delia Garza and Travis County District Attorney Jose Garza were the only prosecutors informally invited to attend the hearing, but neither appeared. The Chair of the Committee asked that the conversation be tabled to give Mr. Garza time to show up. No subpoena was ever issued.
Travis County Attorney Delia Garza did not appear, nor did anyone from her office. However, lawmakers did not seem to notice or make any mention of that absence. Instead, the committee was visibly agitated that the elected Travis County District Attorney was not at the hearing, and they took out their frustration on Travis County Assistant District Attorney Stephanie Gharakhanian, who did show up after hearing their request while following the hearing remotely. The lawmakers’ questions and monologues seemed as much for social media than as genuine questions, and their social media posts after the hearing bolstered that theory. Normally, this type of aggressive questioning is reserved for heads of agencies or elected officials and not for staff, but the gloves were off during their questioning of Ms. Gharakhanian. She refuted claims that the office refused to prosecute violent offenders and stressed that third-party consultants and NGOs exert zero control over her office’s prosecutorial decisions.
TDCAA’s Executive Director, Shannon Edmonds, also appeared at the committee’s request to testify as a resource witness. Chairman Cody Vasut (R-Angleton) asked Shannon if the Texas House already has impeachment power over district attorneys. In his testimony, Shannon explained that elected prosecutors are county or district constitutional officers whose removal process is explicitly governed by Article V of the Texas Constitution rather than statewide legislative impeachment under Article 15.
Later in the hearing, Representative Carl Tepper (R-Lubbock) asked Shannon what the legislature can do about repeat misdemeanor offenders and offenders who suffer from mental health problems. Shannon gave three succinct answers that are definitely worth the watch to help you answer these questions from your own local officials. He explained:
1. For the past 10–15 years, the Legislature specifically instructed prosecutors to divert non-violent property offenders, reserving prison for people society fears, not people we’re mad at.
2. Texas lacks a simple mechanism to bump repeat misdemeanors into felonies. Prior legislative attempts to create enhancements failed due to massive fiscal costs to the State.
3. Prosecutors are barred from prosecuting defendants who are legally incompetent or insane. People should not blame the criminal justice system for the failures of the mental health system.
Despite constructive discussions like that, the majority of the hearing consisted of advocacy groups, law enforcement organizations, and other witnesses who vented their frustrations with “rogue prosecutors,” with most of the arrows going towards the Travis County District Attorney’s Office. There was some discussion on the actual posted topic, though. That included testimony from a representative of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund (LELDF) who presented open-records findings alleging that an Austin-based group called the Wren Collective has served as a shadow administration for the “Texas Five” (read: urban progressive DAs) to ghostwrite bail and charging guidelines and coordinate legal strategy behind non-disclosure agreements while receiving funds from national political donors like George Soros. (You can read more about those allegations in this report from last year.) FYI, the “Texas Five” were identified as Travis County District Attorney José Garza, Bexar County Criminal District Attorney Joe Gonzales, Dallas County Criminal District Attorney John Creuzot, former Harris County District Attorney Kim Ogg, and former Nueces County District Attorney Mark Gonzalez. And for those of you counting at home, as of January 2027 only Jose Garza will still be in office.
The LELDF witness proposed a statutory ban prohibiting prosecutors from entering into non-disclosure agreements with outside consultants, which was squarely on topic. However, there were plenty of other legislative fixes proposed by the witnesses in this wide-ranging discussion of “rogue DAs,” including finding easier paths to removing elected prosecutors and creating a statewide prosecutor model that, just coincidentally, has been a part of Governor Abbott’s re-election campaign since at least December of 2025.
Final Thoughts
The hearing was a preview of what we expect from the upcoming legislative session next year as state leaders attempt to further regulate all local prosecutors in an attempt to unseat the last member of the “Texas Five” who is still in office. The major players in this arena testified in this hearing and their discussions of various policy changes brought to light some surprising truths. For instance, one prevalent theme was that many lawmakers still do not understand the magistration process or how initial bonds are set upon arrest. They assume that all prosecutor offices have a representative at those hearings who is making the decisions on who stays in jail and who gets out. It also seems that there is an appetite to increase punishment for misdemeanor crimes, including non-violent property offenses. (Rest in Peace, “Smart on Crime” movement! Born 2014 – Died 2026.) In light of these trends, now is a good time to meet with your local elected officials to make sure they understand whether the problems highlighted in this hearing are happening in your jurisdiction. Please reach out to us if you have any questions or comments.
Quotes
“What do you do? This is what you do. You carry this around.”
—Representative Richard Raymond (D-Laredo) flashing his pistol during the House Select Committee on Governmental Oversight hearing after telling the other members that the Travis County Attorney’s Office declined to charge someone who had threatened him.
“This is part of the problem. Y’all hiding the weenie. So nobody knows what’s going on.”
—Representative Richard Hayes (R-Lake Dallas) expressing his frustration with the Travis County District Attorney’s Office’s refusal to provide details about their decision-making process in specific cases during the House Select Committee on Governmental Oversight hearing.