AT A GLANCE
- Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton released a 74-page legal opinion on Martin Luther King Jr. Day attacking diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs statewide.
- The opinion criticizes decades-old guidance issued by John Cornyn, Paxton’s opponent in the March 3 Republican U.S. Senate primary.
- Legal experts say the opinion is not binding and cannot overturn state law.
- Cornyn accused Paxton of abusing his office for political gain, raising campaign ethics concerns.
Ken Paxton Uses DEI Legal Opinion on MLK Day to Attack John Cornyn Ahead of U.S. Senate Primary
In an exhaustive legal opinion released on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton took direct aim at diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives across Texas, while also taking a political swipe at his Republican primary opponent, John Cornyn.
The 74-page opinion criticizes decades-old guidance issued during Cornyn’s tenure as Texas attorney general from 1999 to 2002, describing it as constitutionally flawed and long overdue for reversal. Paxton argues that programs designed to offset historical discrimination against people of color and women—whether in government, education, or the private sector—amount to unconstitutional discrimination.
In a statement accompanying the opinion, Paxton declared, “It’s imperative that all private-sector employers, schools, and state and local government entities — based on this legal opinion — immediately abolish any DEI, affirmative action, or unconstitutional discrimination programs under their authority.”
Legal Experts Say Attorney General’s Opinion Is Not Binding
Legal scholars quickly pushed back, noting that attorney general opinions do not carry the force of law. While such opinions can influence agencies and courts, they cannot unilaterally invalidate statutes or override legislative intent. Several legal experts stressed that constitutional determinations must ultimately be decided by the courts.
Cornyn responded sharply, accusing Paxton of using the Office of the Attorney General as a political weapon in their closely watched GOP primary.
“Was this bogus ‘opinion’ an illegal, in-kind contribution to his campaign?” Cornyn wrote on social media. “Inquiring minds (and the Federal Election Commission) want to know. Abusing his government office for personal and political gain. AGAIN.”
Paxton’s opinion goes beyond government policy, reaching deep into the private sector. He argues that employee resource groups, peer mentoring programs, diversity fellowships, recruitment partnerships with historically Black colleges and universities, and even certain early-career pipeline programs could expose employers to lawsuits and financial penalties.
“This includes diversity fellowships restricted to certain racial or gender populations, summer programs for law students in which race or sex are considered for eligibility, preferred application tracks, and mentorship initiatives exclusively available to certain racial or gender groups,” the opinion states.
Paxton also claims that mandatory anti-racism or anti-gender discrimination training can create a hostile work environment. “DEI trainings can, and often do, ‘set the stage for actionable misconduct by the organizations that employ them,’” the opinion declares.
Civil Rights Groups Reject Paxton’s Constitutional Claims
The timing of the release drew sharp criticism. Paxton issued the opinion on Martin Luther King Jr. Day—a holiday Texas still observes alongside Confederate Heroes Day—prompting accusations that the move was deliberately provocative. Civil rights advocates said the opinion twists constitutional language to undermine efforts aimed at fulfilling Dr. King’s vision of a more equitable society.
The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund rejected Paxton’s reasoning, saying programs targeted at addressing persistent inequities advance, rather than violate, equal protection principles.
“These programs seek to level the playing field for Black people and other groups who continue to experience discrimination in employment and remain consistently underrepresented across most types of state contracts,” the organization said in a statement. “Thus, contrary to this flawed legal opinion, such efforts advance — rather than violate — the equal protection and antidiscrimination principles in our state and federal laws.”
Despite its non-binding nature, the opinion has already had tangible effects. Acting Texas Comptroller Kelly Hancock announced that his agency would suspend all new Historically Underutilized Business certifications used for bidding on government contracts, signaling that state agencies may treat Paxton’s guidance as de facto policy.
Paxton frames his argument as a defense of fairness, invoking former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s view that programs benefiting one group necessarily disadvantage another. Critics counter that this zero-sum framing ignores extensive research showing that equitable policies expand economic opportunity rather than restrict it.
GOP Primary Fight Intensifies Ahead of March GOP Senate Vote
As the March primary approaches, Paxton’s legal opinion has become both a policy declaration and a campaign tactic—one that sharpens ideological divides within the Republican Party while placing the authority of the attorney general’s office squarely at the center of a high-stakes Senate race.
