(The Center Square) – An attorney whose law license was suspended for two years because of a Washington state Attorney General’s complaint against her for representing a group trying to block illegal residents from voting is appealing the sanction to the Washington State Bar Association’s Disciplinary Board.
The controversy comes at the federal government has pursued legal action against the Washington Secretary of State’s Office for refusing to turn over the state’s voter registration data.
After the 2020 election, Virginia Shogren represented the Washington Election Integrity Coalition United in a lawsuit against then-Gov. Jay Inslee, alleging that he was allowing the Department of Licensing to automatically register noncitizens to vote. That violated the state constitution’s requirement that voters be U.S. citizens, she claimed.
WEICU said this contributed to potential voter fraud in the 2020 election.
Shogren is currently involved in a legal challenge to a recent Clallam Conservation District supervisor election, in which Thurston County Superior Court ruled that It was “procedurally flawed.”
Washington is among the states that do not require verification of citizenship to register to vote. The Center Square has reported instances of foreign nationals being registered to vote without their knowledge by the DOL. Additionally, The Center Square reported that a foreign national found illegally voting for two decades received no jail time. Foreign nationals convicted of illegally voting can be deported and denied the ability to apply for citizenship.
WEICU’s lawsuit was later dismissed by the State Supreme Court Commissioner Michael Johnston as frivolous. He imposed sanctions. AGO Solicitor General Noah Purcell then filed a bar complaint with the WSBA against Shogren. The WSBA’s Disciplinary Board charged Shogren of pursuing a frivolous action and failing to comply with the sanctions.
At her Dec. 18 appeal, Shogren argued that the complaint filed by Purcell was done due to the subject matter of the lawsuit, telling the Disciplinary Board they had a “golden opportunity….to proudly set the record straight.” She stated that the hearings officer for her bar investigation did not include certain evidence, including testimony from a retired Department of Licensing employee regarding voter fraud.
“This appeal is like a room where you can’t move without banging your knee on the state constitution, and it may feel uncomfortable,” she told the disciplinary board during her Dec. 18 appeal. “But I want to assure all of you that when it comes to free and equal elections, when it comes to an attorney’s right to accept representation on controversial or unpopular subject matter, or when it comes to the defense of government disciplinary charges, that we can agree that our system should be fair, impartial, and lawful.”
However, the hearing officer Ben Attanasio countered that Shogren was guilty of filing a frivolous lawsuit based on Johnston’s decision.
While she said she refused to testify because she was entitled to a jury trial, Attanasio said it was not a criminal matter and therefore she was not entitled to one.
In an interview with The Center Square Shrogen said that “I am concerned that it’s part of an effort to silence attorneys and a part of effort to silence small nonprofits who seek election integrity.”
She added that “it’s pretty darn clear” the bar complaint was “about subject matter, and the subject matter that seems to cross the line is election integrity.
Regarding the federal lawsuit against the state over voter registration information, she said “that they have had to sue the state for the same data to review and – our case was deemed frivolous by the State Supreme Court no less – is seriously concerning on many levels.”
When The Center Square reached out to AGO, Deputy Communications Director Mike Faulk wrote that “lawyers should be able to represent controversial clients without fear of government retaliation, but lawyers are not allowed to file lawsuits (regardless of the client) with no basis in fact or law.”
He also wrote that “the Washington Supreme Court found that Ms. Shogren filed a frivolous lawsuit (that was not just something we “alleged”), and her lawsuit was both an attempt to undermine confidence in elections and a waste of taxpayer resources.”
