Is Ken Paxton’s luck running out?

5th Circuit ruling is a shocking message to the public.

You have to hand it to Ken Paxton. He never tires of evading the consequences of abusing his office.

And why not? So far so good as far as he’s concerned. In the face of overwhelming evidence against him, he skated past conviction in his impeachment trial thanks to Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and friendly Republican senators.

He’s also thus far thwarted, if not defeated, the ongoing civil suit that several of his former top deputies — all deeply conservative public servants — brought after he forced them out of their jobs because they had the good character to take allegations of his criminality to the FBI.

Now, he’s up to his old tricks of throwing sand in the gears of justice at the federal level. And it appears he’s using the resources and personnel of the attorney general’s office to do it.

Here’s the good news. What has so far helped him escape accountability at the state level doesn’t appear to be working in the federal courts.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals published a shocking ruling this week that reads to us as a promise that Paxton may yet answer for the evidence that he corrupted his office. The opinion obscures the fact that it’s referring to the sealed investigation into Paxton. But the breadcrumb trail couldn’t be clearer.

No federal charges have been filed, but we know that a federal investigation is ongoing. What’s more, thanks to the 5th Circuit’s opinion, we also know that Paxton is trying to assert attorney-client privilege as a way to keep the state agency he oversees from having to provide evidence and answers to federal investigators.

That’s not the way it works. Yes, attorney-client privilege is a strong protection. But it doesn’t extend to covering up or taking part in a crime. A district court had already made this clear. But Paxton hoped for better luck with the 5th Circuit. He didn’t get it. What he got, in fact, was a court that reviewed some evidence provided by the Justice Department and a conclusion that “it is plain that the crime-fraud exception to the [attorney-client] privilege is implicated.”

Now, appellate court judges are known for careful writing. When they say “it is plain” that there is evidence of criminal activity, they aren’t whistling in the wind.

We know now that the feds haven’t given up on pursuing Paxton. The 5th Circuit’s highly unusual decision to make public its opinion in the sealed and ongoing grand jury investigation reads to us as a message to the public and perhaps to Paxton himself: This case will go forward and, unlike some judges and senators in the state of Texas, we won’t be accepting nonsense as law.

If that is the message, it’s good news. Paxton is an expert at throwing sand in the gears. But we are heartened that those gears are grinding on, bringing us ever closer to truth.