Shasta County risks litigation after attempting to shield federal subpoena

Shasta County is at risk of being sued for failing to produce a federal subpoena after it was requested through the California Public Records Act.  

After Shasta elections official Clint Curtis received a federal subpoena last month, Shasta Scout submitted a public records request on Sept. 11 for a copy of the subpoena. The county responded, saying the document is shielded from disclosure under federal law. That’s not true, said David Loy, legal director of the First Amendment Coalition.

In a letter sent to Shasta County Counsel Joseph Larmour last week — and cc’d to the Shasta County Board of Supervisors today — Loy, who is representing Shasta Scout in the matter, said the county must disclose the subpoena or face imminent litigation. Within hours, the board posted a special meeting notice for Oct. 5, noting anticipated litigation.

The county refused to disclose the subpoena under a rule related to grand jury proceedings, noting that “Records, orders, and subpoenas relating to grand-jury proceedings are kept under seal to the extent and as long as necessary to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of a matter occurring before a grand jury.”

In his letter, Loy said the rule doesn’t apply in this case because it “only authorizes a federal court to seal its own records. It does not cover the County.”

Loy noted that the only part of the rule that might apply is a subsection related to government personnel assisting federal agents. But, Loy added, refusing to disclose the subpoena under that aspect of the law would require the county to “prove by specific and concrete evidence that its personnel were assisting federal law enforcement in a joint investigation.”

So far there’s no indication that Shasta’s personnel have been involved in any way with assisting federal law enforcement in what appears to be an investigation into June ballots. 

“For all these reasons,” Loy wrote in closing, “I ask that the County reconsider its position and disclose the subpoena immediately especially in light of the paramount public interest in disclosure of any matter related to the administration of elections.”

Shasta Scout broke the news of the federal subpoena of Curtis on Sept. 11, shortly after learning about the subpoena and confirming its existence from multiple county sources. 

According to information shared with Shasta Scout, the subpoena directed Curtis to appear in a federal court in Sacramento and bring with him ballot materials from the June primary, including tens of thousands of voted ballots. Since then, Curtis said he was told he did not need to appear in court because the FBI came to Shasta instead.

Curtis’ dealings with federal agents have been shrouded in secrecy, leading to concerns from the public about ballot security and trust in the elections process. 

Amid such concerns, access to the federal subpoena has the potential to shine light on the ways in which federal prosecutors and agents are involved in Shasta County elections, something of national significance in the runup to the midterm elections, especially given national instability around election processes. 

Today CalMatters’ confirmed that its’ request for the federal subpoena was also rejected by Shasta County. That’s unacceptable, CalMatters Managing Editor John D’Anna indicated during a phone call today.

“Voter integrity is one of the foremost things on voters’ minds as we move towards the midterm elections,” D’Anna said. “For the county to withhold the contents of a federal subpoena on this issue is a slap in the face to voters.”

Madison Holcomb contributed reporting for this story.

---

Do you have a correction to share? Email us: editor@shastascout.org.