Shasta ROV Clint Curtis addresses federal subpoena, says he wants to hand off ballots for transport to court

Shasta’s top elections official, Clint Curtis, confirmed today that he’s received a federal subpoena to appear in court in Sacramento later this month. 

He said he’s excited to meet with the grand jury to share whatever information he can, adding that he believes they’ll ask him about what he referred to as “counterfeit ballots” from the June election. He also noted that he’s been trying to get a one-on-one meeting with President Donald Trump about his concerns but has not yet been successful.

Over recent months, Curtis has claimed that ballots from the June primary, which he has already certified, don’t “look, feel” or “smell” right. He said today that testifying in federal court will give him a chance to make things right with the election he ran earlier this year.

“This could solve the problem,” Curtis said, of the grand jury process.

As part of the subpoena, Curtis was told by the court to carry tens of thousands of voted ballots to Sacramento where he’ll meet with the grand jury. Curtis noted the complexity of such a process, saying he’d rather hand the ballots off to someone else for transport, if possible.

“They wanted everything.” Curtis said. “I don’t know if they have a concept of how big that is. It’s probably 50 boxes, 100 boxes, I don’t know.”

Curtis suggested he’d have to “rent a U-Haul or something” before adding that maybe the Secretary of State’s Office would be willing to transport the ballots, or federal law enforcement officials could.

“Please come get it,” Curtis said of ballot materials. “Lock it away. Do what you’re supposed to do with it. Don’t make me drag 100 boxes down, load a truck and drive it to Sacramento. That just seems excessive.”

Handing ballots over to either state or federal officials appears illegal under a new California law passed earlier this year, which forbids elections officials from handing off voted ballots. Shasta County Deputy CEO Stewart Buettell also provided an April memo from the Secretary of State’s Office today, emphasizing a longer-standing state law that says ballots shall be kept by the local elections official “unopened and unaltered” after they’re counted. The official said that Shasta County has no comment on Curtis’ plans for ballot transportation.

Curtis said he’d still want to hand the ballots off for transport and would also consider leaving them with the federal court itself after transporting them there. Asked if he’d sought legal advice from Shasta County Counsel Joseph Larmour, Curtis said he’d provided the subpoena to him before referring to Larmour as “a horrible attorney.” 

The California Secretary of State’s Office has not responded to a request for comment on the appropriate chain of custody for transporting the ballots in compliance with the law. And a spokesperson for California’s Department of Justice said only that the agency is “monitoring the situation closely,” adding that there is no additional comment at this time.

But an attorney with the UCLA Voting Rights Project, Legal Director Chad Dunn, weighed in this afternoon. Dunn’s organization has been involved with legal action by the state against Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco over his seizure of ballots earlier this year in response to unproven claims by local activists of election fraud.  

When it comes to the instructions given in Curtis’ federal subpoena, Dunn said, the elections official appears to have a clear path to transport ballots legally, as long as the documents remain in his custody throughout the process. 

“As long as the materials aren’t disturbed, and the chain of custody and other protections are in place,” Dunn explained, “the grand jury being able to inspect these records as part of their questioning of the elections administrator seems to be within the bounds of the law.

“But under no circumstances should federal law enforcement be taking custody of ballots,” Dunn emphasized. “They have to be handled by the local election official.” 

He noted the work of Justin Levitt, a constitutional law scholar and professor at Loyola Law School. Levitt did not respond to a request for comment today, but his recent writing about Bianco’s seizure of ballots referenced federal law that appears to require elections officials to retain exclusive custody in most cases.

“The law is designed to ensure that the records stay in one identifiable place,” Levitt wrote for Lawfare, “where everyone knows they can be found. Government officials with legitimate needs can inspect the records and take copies, but nobody other than the registrar gets exclusive custody, so nobody has to work through a wild goose chase if there’s a need for access.”

Reflecting on the unique circumstances in Shasta right now, Dunn said that believes the public should be “concerned but cautious.”

“If the situation is that federal law enforcement wants to inspect election records, and if they do so while they remain under the custody of the elections official in a way that doesn’t disrupt their chain of custody and organization, then this is a proper exercise,” Dunn said.

“If they are removing the ballots from the elections office or breaking the chain of custody, that’s something about which the public should be deeply disturbed.”

Madison Holcomb contributed reporting for this story.

9.11.2026 5:11 p.m.: We have updated the story to include comment from the DOJ.

---

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