Weaponized justice: The GOP’s war on prosecutors is just the beginning 

All eyes are on Texas — and rightfully so. Late last week, District Attorney José Garza filed a writ of mandamus contesting Gov. Greg Abbott’s pardon of Daniel Perry. Perry was convicted of murder in April of 2023 for driving into a crowd of protestors and ultimately shooting one of those protestors, Garett Foster, to death.  

But this story is bigger than Texas; Abbott’s pardon is part of a larger, right-wing effort to wield the powers of the criminal justice process for their own political purposes, even if it means circumventing the democratic process. Given Republicans’ recent calls across the country to prosecute Democratic foes, that spells trouble for the nation.  

Many have already noted the unusual nature of this pardon.  

First, Abbott announced that he would be granting the pardon mere hours after a jury convicted Perry, without having assessed the facts of the case or the merits of a pardon application. Indeed, Abbott’s explanation for the pardon skips over most of the facts of the case and attempts to relitigate an issue already decided by a jury: none of the jurors that sat through Perry’s trial believed he acted in self-defense. Abbott agreed to pardon Perry shortly after Fox News personality Tucker Carlson and other right-wing politicians and pundits blamed the governor for the verdict.  

Second, Abbott fast-tracked the pardon process for Perry. The Abbott-appointed Board of Pardons issued a recommendation within a week of Perry’s sentencing; Abbott endorsed that recommendation that same day, and Perry was released from jail two hours later. The process typically takes years, after a defendant has already served a significant portion, if not all, of his sentence.  

Third, Abbott has been especially hesitant to grant pardons — even when, unlike in this case, there is evidence of a convicted person’s innocence, as in the cases of Douglas Perry, Rodney Reed, Melissa Lucio or George Floyd. Abbott has never before granted a full pardon for a violent offense.  

But this pardon is troubling for another reason that most have overlooked: The pardon proclamation is overwhelmingly about José Garza, rather than Garett Foster, the murder victim, or Daniel Perry, his killer. 

In his same tweet vowing to pardon Perry the day after his conviction, Abbott made the strange declaration that he had “already prioritized reining in rogue District Attorneys” like Garza. That language resurfaced when Abbott issued the pardon: “Texas has one of the strongest ‘Stand Your Ground’ laws of self-defense that cannot be nullified by a jury or a progressive District Attorney,” he said. He went on without explanation to accuse Garza of “demonstrat[ing] unethical and biased misuse of his office” — a claim already raised by Perry’s defense attorneys and resoundingly rejected by the trial judge.  

If Abbott’s fixation on Garza sounds familiar, that is because it is. He and the Republican Party in Texas have been trying to oust Garza ever since he took office, because Garza’s interest in commonsense criminal justice reforms, including holding top-donor police accountable, is an affront to their political agenda.  

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s recently proposed rule, for example, is designed to give Paxton unchecked power to remove any prosecutors like Garza from office if he does not agree with how they handle their cases, and to replace them with prosecutors of Paxton’s choosing. Republicans are also behind the recently failed efforts to recall Garza. While political disagreements are not unusual, political opponents typically try to win over hearts and minds in transparent forums.

But if pardons, AG rules and recall elections have anything in common, it is that those methods circumvent the democratic process. Whether they are jurors or voters, Austin residents’ voices are silenced when the Republican Party pulls these maneuvers.  

Unfortunately, Austin is the canary in the coal mine. This democracy side-stepping in the criminal legal system is part of a national playbook.  

“Progressive prosecutors” have become Republicans’ cause de jour — even Donald Trump has advertised that tactic as one of his campaign talking points. Across the country, Republicans are ignoring voters’ wills to push out elected (and often, re-elected) prosecutors who do not tow their party line. Look no further than Monique Worrell, Mary Moriarty, Larry Krasner and, most recently, Pamela Price for proof.  

All Americans lose if politicians are allowed to weaponize the judicial system, whether it is Paxton using his AG powers to encourage Texan prosecutors to criminally charge parents who seek affirmative care for their trans children or Georgia Rep. Mike Collins advising “Red State AGs and DAs to get busy” after Trump’s conviction. And because such methods rely on unilateral powers, once this strategy prevails, there will be few ways to put up a fight. 

Candace Mitchell is a principal at the Wren Collective, an organization dedicated to decreasing the criminal legal system’s footprint on communities. Previously she was a public defender in New York and Washington, D.C.