Lindell's story included another tidbit, though, that I hadn't caught from the court's earlier decision: "The motion also asked the court to rescind its decision to let Keller recoup her legal costs from the state, noting that Texas law explicitly bans the practice when judges are investigated for potential wrongdoing." I didn't realize they'd said the state should pay her legal bills and indeed was under the impression they could not do so. Indeed, according to the motion:
Section 33.031 of the Texas Government Code ... expressly prohibits the award of costs or attorneys’ fees in this proceeding. See TEX. GOV’T CODE Section 33.031, “No Award of Costs” (“Court costs or attorney’s fees may not be awarded in a proceeding under this chapter.”)So to recap. First the fact finding judge made sanction recommendations beyond his purview, then the SCJC gave Keller what she called "lawless" leniency by not punishing her more harshly, then the three-judge appellate panel apparently issued its own "lawless" ruling telling the state to pay for Keller's high-priced lawyer.
This whole affair has frequently been called a "circus" and increasingly it's clear that's an apt description: Every step of the process has been governed by clowns.