(The Center Square) – Lawmakers and stakeholders continue to raise concerns over a bill that would grant the Attorney General’s Office broader authority to issue civil investigative demands, a move some critics argue would permit the AGO to potentially go after political rivals.
“This an enormous amount of power to be giving this office, when we’ve already seen corruption and bad behavior on their side,” Rep. Jenny Graham, R-Spokane Valley, said at the bill’s Tuesday public hearing in the House Civil Rights & Judiciary Committee.
Passed by the state Senate last week, Senate Bill 5925 would give the AGO the authority to demand documents and records and/or compel testimony of a person or entity in pursuit of a civil investigation into potential violations of a variety of state laws, as well as the state and U.S. Constitution.
Because it is a civil matter, the AGO does not require a judicial warrant in order to issue a CID, though it can request a judge issue a gag order on the individual subject to the CID. That would makes it a misdemeanor for them to discuss it.
The AGO can also request a court impose sanctions if a person does not comply. Under SB 5925 a person would have to appeal to a court judge to overrule the AGO.
Testifying in opposition to the bill, Spokane county prosecutor Preston McCollam said that the bill give the AG wide powers.
It “grants the AGO the ability to investigate separately elected constitutional offices,” McCollam said. “Any person or entity is potentially subject to this investigative authority, and that includes all of you.”
AGO Assistant Attorney General Chalia Stallings-Ala’ilima sought to downplay the bill’s scope at the public hearing, arguing it would not grant new authority or power and individuals could turn to the Washington State Bar Association if they believed the use of CIDs was being abused.
“We take our responsibilities of professional conduct very seriously,” she said.
However, McCollam said “the argument that the bar association will oversee this is a red herring.”
“The bar association does not oversee the individual actions of a law enforcement agency or an investigative agency to the level that’s necessary for public scrutiny for this type of power,” he said. “In my opinion it should be put down. There is zero restriction here.”
The WSBA has previously told The Center Square that it only investigates individuals as privately licensed attorneys, and the investigations are kept confidential until a public hearing occurs and disciplinary action is taken. While the WSBA can issue fines and letters of reprimand, the final decision to suspend a lawyer’s license is made by the Washington Supreme Court.
Rep. Jim Walsh, R-Aberdeen raised the issue of accountability.
“Who watches the watchman?,” he asked Stallings-Ala’ilima. “What is your process for checking the administration and execution of civil investigative demands? The answer is you (the AGO) watch yourself.”
Others testifying against the bill included James McMahan with the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs, who warned that it would “allow the Attorney General’s Office to bring a law enforcement agency to its knees.
“We believe that government should helping each other serve the public, not suing each other,” he added. “Is the attorney general a law enforcement agency or the watchdog over Washington law enforcement agencies? We don’t think it can be both.”
