In a bold move, Travis County District Attorney José Garza announced on Tuesday that his office will be challenging Texas Governor Greg Abbott's pardon of Daniel Perry, who fatally shot Black Lives Matter protester Garrett Foster during a rally in 2020. Garza and his team will be seeking a writ of mandamus from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, arguing that the pardon was contrary to the law and undermined the sanctity of the legal system.

Last month, Perry, a U.S. Air Force veteran, was pardoned by Governor Abbott, one year after receiving a 25-year prison sentence for Foster's death. This decision has sparked outrage, with Garza accusing Abbott and the Board of Pardons and Paroles of prioritizing politics over justice. During a news conference, Garza expressed his disappointment, stating, "They should be ashamed of themselves. Their actions were contrary to the law."

By filing for a writ of mandamus, Garza aims to restore the rule of law in Texas. This legal action, usually reserved for extraordinary circumstances, will require intervention from the state's highest criminal court. Garza acknowledged the rarity of pursuing such a course, admitting, "You are asking a higher court to weigh in and tell an elected official to do the right thing."

While the Court of Criminal Appeals comprises nine elected judges, all Republican, Garza remains determined to exhaust all available options. He stated that his team would continue to pursue every avenue to challenge the pardon.

During Perry's trial, he claimed self-defense, arguing that he shot Foster after Foster raised his weapon. However, eyewitnesses contradicted Perry's account, stating they did not see Foster point the firearm at him or his vehicle. Nonetheless, Abbott, citing Texas's "stand your ground" laws, urged the Board of Pardons and Paroles to expedite Perry's pardon. The review board unanimously recommended his release, leading to Abbott's surprising decision.

Governor Abbott, when confronted with Garza's intentions to overturn the pardon, remained defiant, citing the Texas Constitution's provision that grants him the power to grant pardons after conviction based on the recommendation of the Board of Pardons and Paroles.

Perry's attorney, Doug O'Connell, dismissed Garza's actions as political theater and defended the governor's use of pardons as a constitutionally authorized authority.

The announcement by Garza drew support from Sheila Foster, Garrett Foster's mother, who called the governor's pardon "absolutely unacceptable." She emphasized that her son was exercising his constitutional rights when he was tragically killed and expressed her deep dissatisfaction with the governor's decision.

It is worth noting that last week, 14 Democratic attorneys general from various states signed a letter urging the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate the possibility of federal prosecution against Perry. The letter alleges that the killing was racially motivated and aimed at suppressing constitutional rights.

As the legal battle unfolds, the case of Daniel Perry remains a stirring reminder of the deep divisions surrounding issues of racial justice and the exercise of constitutional rights in the United States.