This substack does not ordinarily cover Louisiana news or politics. This article is an exception. What happened to the Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill this past week needs to be understood (and condemned). She was indicted by a Grand Jury in New Orleans over letters she sent to New Orleans elected officials. This illegitimate indictment is reminiscent of the equally illegitimate indictments of President Trump by Deep Blue Cities/jurisdictions and is more proof some cities in this Country simply cannot be trusted with power. Here is what happened.
Background: The New Orleans Criminal Clerk and Civil Clerk
Orleans Parish, Louisiana (a Parish in Louisiana is the equivalent of a County elsewhere), until very recently, had a civil clerk of court and a criminal clerk of court. This arrangement was created by the Louisiana Constitutional Convention in 1879. For decades, Orleans Parish was the only parish in the State with a civil clerk and a criminal clerk, when all the remaining 63 parishes had only one clerk of court performing all civil and criminal functions.
In the most recent legislative session this spring, the Louisiana Legislature, passed Act 15 of 2026, abolishing the Orleans Parish Criminal Clerk’s office and consolidated all of the criminal clerk’s duties and functions into the office of the existing Orleans Parish Civil Clerk.
The legislature passed the law abolishing the Orleans Parish Criminal Clerk’s office just days before Calvin Duncan, a black man who served 28 years in prison after being wrongfully convicted of murder, was set to take office. Instead, the criminal clerk’s office was folded over into the civil clerk’s office and the criminal clerk’s office was abolished. The Orleans Parish Civil Clerk of Court is Chelsey Richard Napoleon, a black female who held the office for several years.
Litigation Over Act 15 of 2026
A number of legal challenges were brought against Act 15, including one in Federal District Court in the Middle District of Louisiana by Calvin Duncan, the man recently elected Orleans Parish Criminal Clerk. In that case, the federal judge ruled in favor of Duncan and granted a Temporary Restraining Order on May 3, 2026, preventing Act 15 from taking effect:
The following day the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a stay of the federal district court's ruling. This stay allowed the law abolishing the Orleans Parish Criminal Clerk of Court’s office to take effect:
Meanwhile challenges filed in Louisiana State Court made their way to the Louisiana Supreme Court. The Louisiana Supreme Court rejected those challenges on June 1, 2026 and upheld the law abolishing the Orleans Parish Criminal Clerk’s office as a valid exercise of legislative power:
Some New Orleans Officials Were Not Happy
On May 7, 2026, the New Orleans District Attorney sent a letter to the New Orleans City Council to call a special meeting and appoint an “interim clerk.” The next day, on May 8, 2026, the Mayor of New Orleans Helena Moreno wrote a letter to the New Orleans City Council claiming the Orleans Parish Clerk of Court (the name given to the now consolidated office of the Civil Clerk after the abolishment of the Criminal Clerk office) is a newly created, vacant office for which an election must be held.
In response, in May 11, 2026, the New Orleans City Council passed two resolutions: one calling for a special election to fill the supposedly vacant new office of the Orleans Parish Clerk of Court and another appointing a retired judge, Calvin Johnson, as Interim Clerk.
In the Louisiana State Court litigation, as noted above, the Louisiana Supreme Court rejected the challenges to the law. Prior to that the Louisiana Supreme Court stopped the “Interim clerk” from taking office and enjoined all officials from interfering with the duties of Chelsey Richardon Napoleon (the former Orleans Parish Civil Clerk who Act 15 made the sole “clerk of court.”)
The Louisiana AG Steps In
After the New Orleans DA & Mayor fired off their letters to the New Orleans City Council the Louisiana Attorney General wrote to the New Orleans City Council and advised the DA and Mayor’s analysis is “plainly wrong,” that the legislature did not create a new office, but rolled the criminal clerk’s office into that of the existing civil clerk and, as such, no vacancy exists. The Louisiana AG, very properly and responsibly, urged the City Council to “exercise restraint while the Louisiana Supreme Court addresses” the legal questions at issue.
The New Orleans City Council ignored the Attorney General’s suggestions and issued its resolutions purporting to appoint an Interim Clerk and calling for a special election to fill the supposedly “vacant office” on May 11, 2026. Thereafter, on May 13, 2026, the Louisiana Attorney General sent letters to all of the above outlining why their actions were unlawful and how their actions implicate Louisiana’s “usurper statutes.”
The Attorney General posted the letters online. The Attorney General outlined to the New Orleans’ elected officials how they would put their elected offices in jeopardy by supporting a “usurper” of the office and how the “usurper” himself might face criminal charges. This paragraph from the letter to the City Council states the gist of the claims:
The relevant provisions of Louisiana Usurpation of Office statute, La. R.S. 42:71, cited by the Attorney General, are reproduced here:
The provision cited by the AG imposing forfeiture of office on those elected officials who recognize the authority of the usurper, La. R.S. 42:72, is reproduced here:
The Attorney General requested the City Council “rescind” or “suspend” the resolutions appointing and “interim clerk” and calling for a special election. They refused to do so.
The Indictment
Thereafter, on July 2, 2026, after the appointment of a Special Prosecutor, a Grand Jury in New Orleans indicted Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill on 16 felony counts, including 8 counts of violating La. R.S. 14:122 (retaliation against an elected official) and 8 counts of violating La. R.S. 14:134 (malfeasance in office) for her efforts to stop the New Orleans City Council from violating the law.
Here are the relevant provisions of La. R.S. 14:122:
Here are the relevant provisions of La. R.S. 14:134:
Keep in mind, by the time the Indictment was handed down on July 2, 2026, the Louisiana Supreme Court had already STOPPED the “interim clerk” from taking office and STOPPED anyone else from interfering with the TRUE clerk, Chelsey Richard Napoleon. The Supreme Court also ruled that (1) there was no “vacant” office, because Act 15 of 2026 rolled the criminal clerk’s duties over into the civil clerk’s office, which is held by Chelsey Richard Napoleon, and (2) the Louisiana Legislature had the legal authority to abolish the criminal clerk’s office.
Stated another way, before the Indictment was issued the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled precisely the way the Louisiana Attorney General argued it would.
The Indictment is Ridiculous
The Louisiana Supreme Court long ago found La. R.S. 14:122 required “threats of harm or injury of the person,” as well as “actual or threatened physical violence.” See State v. Daniels, 109 so. 2d 896 (La. 1959)(on rehearing). Other cases confirm the need for threats of violence under the retaliation against an elected official provision. See State v. Meyers, 643 So. 2d 1275 (La. App. 5th Cir. 1994) and State v. Love, 602 So. 2d 1014 (La. App. 3d Cir. 1992). Coupled with the familiar rule that criminal statutes must be “strictly construed,” the law clearly shows this Indictment is illegitimate.
The Louisiana Attorney General did not threaten anyone with violence of any kind, let alone the New Orleans City Council. On the contrary, the AG informed the City Council and others of the potentially illegal acts they were undertaking and what action she would take to challenge their illegality. That is her job.
Next, regarding the “malfeasance” counts, the law requires the accused to “intentionally refuse or fail to perform any duty lawfully required” or to “intentionally perform any such duty in an unlawful manner.”
The Attorney General correctly informed the New Orleans City officials of the applicable law and the potential consequences of their actions. There is nothing unlawful about that. In fact, had the Attorney General been wrong (she wasn’t), she would have still done nothing “unlawful.”
In short, this Indictment is political theater. It is an abusive, disgusting, grossly improper piece of political theater, but it is political theater nonetheless.
The Louisiana Supreme Court Steps In
The day after the Indictment was issued, the Louisiana Supreme Court issued a stay of the Indictment, effectively stopping the prosecution. When the New Orleans Special Prosecutor claimed she would arrest the Attorney General despite the stay, the Supreme Court followed up later the same day and recalled the arrest warrant and ordered the Special Prosecutor and everyone else to stand down. The Supreme Court observed this additional order should have been unnecessary:
The Louisiana Supreme Court also noted glaring conflicts of interest involving the Special Prosecutor, including the fact (1) the Special Prosecutor, Laurie White, previously served as Clark Duncan’s attorney (Mr. Duncan was the man who was elected Orleans Parish Criminal Clerk, but could not assume the office because it was abolished) and (2) that Ms. White is being defended by the Attorney General’s office in a sexual harassment suit.
The Supreme Court noted irregularities with how the Grand Jury Indictment was handled:
In fact, when this Indictment was handed down several reporters and one attorney were detained and handcuffed when they allegedly refused to follow the orders of court officials:
Louisiana Supreme Court Associate Justice Jay McCallum probably put it best in his concurring opinion granting the stay of the Indictment:
I can assure you, Supreme Court justice rarely make such proclamations about disciplinary action against judges and lawyers.
In addition, Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry recently announced the Louisiana State Police will investigate the Grand Jury proceedings in New Orleans. Let’s hope the State Police uncover all of the wrongdoing in this case.
Conclusion
Once again, clownish elected officials in New Orleans embarrass Louisiana. The Louisiana Attorney General did her job. Nothing more, nothing less. And she was correct on the law, though she did not need to be. New Orleans officials put a deeply conflicted former judge in charge of getting a Grand Jury Indictment against the Attorney General on plainly inadequate legal grounds under statutes the AG did not violate. Worse, the entire process appears to be tainted. Fortunately, the Louisiana Supreme Court called a swift halt to it.
When this is all over, every lawyer and elected official involved in this Indictment will be lucky to have law licenses or hold their offices. Furthermore, the only elected officials potentially guilty of malfeasance in this case (that is, performing duties in an unlawful manner or intentionally refusing to perform lawfully required duties) were the elected officials in New Orleans who tried to fill an office that was not vacant and who tried to call a special election for an office that was filled. Wouldn’t it be poetic if everyone of these people faced their own indictments? Time will tell.
Many people are playing the race card claiming the legislature did not want an African-American to hold the Orleans Parish Criminal Clerk’s office. The problem with that argument is the Orleans Parish Civil Clerk to whom the Criminal Clerk’s duties and authority were granted by Act 15 of 2026 is an African American female, who sued on her own behalf to retain the rights granted to her by Act 15. The race hustlers won’t say a word about that.
Great Article.