Featured Image
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton

You’re invited! Join LifeSite in celebrating 25 years of pro-life and pro-family reporting at our anniversary Gala August 17th in Naples, Florida. Tickets and sponsorships can be purchased by clicking here. 

AUSTIN (LifeSiteNews) – Texas’ chief legal officer would be willing to challenge a Supreme Court decision that protects homosexual acts.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton told NewsNation anchor Leland Vittert that he would be willing to test the state’s anti-sodomy law at the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) depending on the law’s constitutionality.

The statement followed a question about Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurring opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, in which he stated that SCOTUS should reexamine all its due process precedents, including a ruling that declared laws banning homosexual acts unconstitutional.

Paxton, speaking to Vittert on June 24, was asked if he would be willing to defend a law that would challenge SCOTUS’ due process precedents when dealing with sodomy.

“Yes. I mean there’s all kinds of issues here, but certainly the Supreme Court has stepped into issues that I don’t think there’s any constitutional provisions dealing with,” Paxton said. “They were legitimate issues, and this is one of those issues, and there may be more. So, it would depend on the issue and depend on what state law had said at the time.”  

READ: Texas GOP platform calls homosexuality an ‘abnormal lifestyle choice’

When pressed by Vittert that he would not rule out defending such a law, Paxton said “My job is to defend state law, and I’ll continue to do that. That’s my job under the constitution, and I’m willing to do that.” When pressed further, Paxton said “I’d have to take a look at it. This is all new territory for us so I’d have to see how the legislation was laid out and whether we thought we could defend it.”

“Ultimately, if it’s constitutional, we’re going to defend it,” Paxton concluded. 

READ: Texas gov. declares transgender drugs and surgeries are child abuse, orders investigations

Vittert’s questions came as a result of remarks made by Justice Thomas in his concurring opinion in Dobbs, in which he wrote that SCOTUS should reexamine its due process precedents in the wake of overruling Roe v. Wade 

“The Court well explains why, under our substantive due process precedents, the purported right to abortion is not a form of ‘liberty protected by the Due Process Clause,’” Thomas wrote. “For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell,” Thomas wrote.  

In Lawrence v. Texas, SCOTUS struck down anti-sodomy laws as unconstitutional based on due process arguments like those found in Roe.

Similar laws still exist in 15 other states. If SCOTUS overturns Lawrence, then those laws would immediately go into effect, according to the New York Daily News.

Rochelle Garza, a Democrat who is running against Paxton for attorney general, tweeted that “Roe was just the first — they won’t stop till they roll back all of our civil rights.” 

Paxton has a history of combating LGBT ideology. In March, he warned that the Austin Independent School District violated Texas law by proposing a “pride” themed curriculum, which Paxton maintained violated Texas law. In September 2021, Paxton filed a lawsuit against the Biden administration for its attempt to force businesses to implement gender ideology. 

Earlier this year, Paxton announced in an advisory opinion that transgender “sex change” practices for minors constitute child abuse under the Texas Family Code.