An online debate ensued after Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton declined to publicly comment on one of the most closely followed cases before the Texas Medical Board.

“I really would like to focus on the Speaker’s stuff, there’s 1,000 other issues that we can deal with later. So, talk to me later about that,” Paxton said at a press conference following a campaign event he was holding in Fort Worth to build support for Rep. David Cook’s bid for Texas Speaker of the House.

Paxton was responding to a question from The Dallas Express asking, “[Do] you plan to intervene in Mary Talley Bowden’s case with the Texas Medical Board?”

As of this writing, a video of the exchange had roughly 100k views and prompted fiery responses from viewers, including Paxton’s top advisors.

“Knowing he’ll be able to avoid this until after the trial?” one X user, Irish Grasshopper, posted.

Referencing Paxton’s failed impeachment in the summer of 2023, another user, E Nicole Cooper MD, posted, “For a man relieved he was vindicated from career-ending charges, hoping he will empathize and act quickly.

The Attorney General’s Senior Advisor, Michelle Smith, hit back with several dozen comments under the video.

“I’ll answer that for him. Since I work for him. He legally CAN’T intervene in any Medical Board case. The office is a referral agency. It’s so wrong to ask the Attorney General about any case with hundreds of people standing right there,” Smith commented. “He’s the State lawyer and he can’t talk about cases right at an event, and he handles over 30,000 cases.”

Smith claimed that Paxton was unaware of Bowden’s case.

He’s [sic] doesn’t know what case you are specifically talking about just to ask him right there in front of everyone,” she said before adding, “The Medical Board is controlled by the Governor and they have their own legal team. The AG cannot just go intervene in any case. They must refer the case to our office and even then, the AG would decide if he would take it or not. If he doesn’t take it, the Medical Board would then have the right to go get outside counsel.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DALLAS EXPRESS APP

She concluded her post by adding some background information. “For back ground [sic] the AG would only get involved in a case with ANY STATE AGENCY, if the case is referred. We have no intervention abilities. I hope that answers your question.

It is unclear how Paxton would not know what case DX referred to.

State Reps. Briscoe Cain (R-Deer Park) and Brian Harrison (R-Midlothian) made headlines in late December when they demanded that the Texas Medical Board (TMB) fire its Planned Parenthood-tied medical director after the board announced that it intended to use him as a witness against Bowden in its case before the State Office of Administrative Hearings, The Dallas Expres reported.

Other state reps have addressed Paxton directly to take action on the case. Rep. Steve Toth (R-The Woodlands) penned a letter to Gov. Greg Abbott and Att. Gen. Ken Paxton, which he posted to X in April 2024.

“Dr. Bowden has been the victim of the reckless actions of the Texas Medical Board,” Toth said in a social media post. “The TMB violated the basic tenets of her due process rights. Why? Because she dared to use FDA-approved ivermectin and saved 6,000 lives in the process. @GovAbbott and @KenPaxtonTX, we need your help to stop this injustice.”

At the time, Toth was joined by Rep. Tony Tinderholt (R-Arlington), who appeared with Paxton at the campaign event. Speaking to DX after the event, Tinderholt said, “What [Texas Medical Board] are doing to [Mary Talley Bowden] is a horrible thing; it’s a travesty, it’s unethical.”

Bowden has also called on Paxton to take action against the board, DX reported. Moreover, DX previously offered Paxton several opportunities to comment on the case in 2024.

Regarding Paxton’s ability to take action, Bowden responded to Smith with a legal analysis from her attorneys. A copy-and-paste document posted on X argues that the Office of the Attorney General has constitutional authority over all litigation by the State and can intervene against agencies taking unlawful action.

1. The Attorney General has constitutional authority over all litigation by the State of Texas. ‘The Attorney General, as the chief legal officer of the State, has broad discretionary power in conducting his legal duty and responsibility to represent the State. Terrazas v. Ramirez, 829 S.W.2d 712, 721–22 (Tex. 1991); Tex. Const. art. IV, Sec. 22; Tex. Gov’t Code § 402.021.

Another section of the analysis explained the element of illegal action from state agencies.

2. The Attorney General has the authority and duty to rein in illegal or ultra vires actions by state agencies. Because of the discretion the Attorney General has over state litigation matters, the Attorney General has no obligation to – and should not – defend illegal or ultra vires actions by state agencies. Hall v. McRaven, 508 S.W.3d 232, 238 (Tex. 2017) (‘ultra vires acts…should not be considered acts of the state.’)

Expanding on this reasoning, the post contended that there was precedent.

The Texas Supreme Court has held that ‘ultra vires suits do not attempt to exert control over the state—they attempt to reassert the control’ of the state over one of its agents. Matzen v. McClane, 659 S.W.3d 381 (Tex. 2021). Under that precedent, the Attorney General has the authority to intervene in private actions where a state agency has exceeded its lawful authority. This includes in the [State Office of Administrative Hearings] where a “person” may be admitted as a party to an SOAH hearing upon showing of a justiciable interest (22 Tex. Admin. Code § 187.23(c)).

The post closed by arguing that “3. The State Office of Administrative Hearings has exceeded its statutory and constitutional authority.”

TMB launched a case against Bowden in 2023 over her attempted treatment of an ailing sheriff’s deputy with ivermectin in 2021. While ivermectin was hotly debated among pandemic-era physicians, Bowden says she found the anti-parasitic drug effective when used early in several thousand COVID-19 cases she treated.

The case has been shrouded in contention since it was first brought, and this was compounded after DX obtained emails and texts showing that those within the TMB had been watching the Houston doctor since she first publicly criticized COVID-19 vaccine mandates. Some board members who presided over Bowden’s case appeared to harbor strong negative sentiments about her.

While Bowden’s TMB case continues, she has had some legal victories. In 2024, after some legal wrangling in the federal appellate courts, the FDA settled a case brought by Bowden and agreed to delete certain material the agency had posted that directed the public not to take ivermectin, giving the impression it was either ineffective or illegal.

Later, a top DOJ attorney was caught on a hidden camera confessing that the FDA was wrong in that case.