Based on Christina Drewry’s (Smith County Precinct 1 Commissioner) recent exposure of Sheriff Larry Smith, in her email "Silenced for Asking Questions: The Sheriff's Gag Order Exposed," several potential legal and ethical issues are raised regarding Sheriff Larry Smith's Directive LRS2-14-25, issued on February 14, 2025. The directive prohibits Sheriff’s Office employees from communicating with Commissioner Drewry about Sheriff’s Office business, with threats of termination for non-compliance. Below is a summary of the potential charges or legal violations:

1. Violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act (TOMA), Chapter 551:

   • The directive may interfere with the transparency required by TOMA, which mandates that Commissioners Court conduct business openly. By restricting Drewry’s access to information necessary for public deliberation, the directive could undermine the Act’s spirit, potentially constituting an indirect violation.

2. Interference with Commissioner’s Authority (Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 81):

   • The Commissioners Court oversees the county’s budget and certain operational policies, including those of the Sheriff’s Office. The directive may obstruct Drewry’s lawful oversight role, potentially violating the separation of powers within county government by limiting her ability to ensure responsible use of county resources.

3. Infringement on Employees’ Free Speech Rights:

   • The directive may violate the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article 1, Section 8 of the Texas Constitution by restricting Sheriff’s Office employees’ rights to speak on matters of public concern. Prohibiting communication with a public official like Drewry could be seen as an unconstitutional restriction, especially if deemed retaliatory.

4. Retaliation Against a Public Official:

   • The directive appears to be a retaliatory response to Drewry’s questioning of Sheriff Smith during a Commissioners Court meeting on February 11, 2025. If the directive was issued to punish Drewry for exercising her free speech, it could constitute unlawful retaliation, complicating its legality.

5. Abuse of Official Capacity (Texas Penal Code, Section 39.02):

   • Issuing the directive to silence or punish Drewry based on her “behavior” (undefined in the document) could be construed as Sheriff Smith misusing his authority. This might expose him to criminal liability if the action is deemed to harm Drewry’s duties or misuse county resources for personal vendetta.

6. Violation of Statutory Duties (Texas Local Government Code, Section 85.001 et seq.):

   • Sheriff Smith’s duties include executing legal processes and managing the county jail, but not obstructing other elected officials’ functions. The directive, by targeting Drewry and conditioning its removal on her “behavior,” may exceed his statutory authority, conflicting with the collaborative structure of county government.

7. Potential Civil Rights Violation (42 U.S.C. § 1983):

   • If the directive deprives Drewry of her right to participate in county governance without due process, it could give rise to a civil rights claim. This might include infringing on her ability to represent constituents or engage in budget oversight.

Statement on Amending the Petition to Remove Sheriff Larry Smith

We will be amending our petition to remove Smith County Sheriff Larry Smith from office. This decision is driven by the issuance of Directive LRS2-14-25, which prohibits Sheriff’s Office employees from communicating with Commissioner Christina Drewry, undermining transparency, accountability, and the constitutional duties of an elected official. The directive, coupled with Sheriff Smith’s reported pattern of heavy-handed tactics against other officials, threatens the principles of open governance and public trust. Our amended petition will address these actions, including potential violations of the Texas Open Meetings Act, interference with Commissioner’s authority, infringement on free speech, and possible abuse of official capacity, as outlined in Commissioner Drewry’s document. We stand for a Sheriff’s Office that serves the public, not one that silences dissent or obstructs oversight.

Read more about other events that occurred prior to this directive below the Online Citizen Petition…