Attorney General Orders Gallatin County to Drop Petition Challenging His Supervisory Control
Gallatin County previously filed petition to Supreme Court in controversy related to confidential criminal information
By Jordan Hansen, Daily Montanan
Following the takeover of the Gallatin County Attorney General’s Office by the state, Attorney General Austin Knudsen is now telling the county to drop its own petition to the Supreme Court against the state.
On April 30, the AG’s office took “supervisory control” over the Gallatin County Attorney’s Office, alleging they had policies that violated state law. Gallatin County attorney Audrey Cromwell has said — and swore an affidavit to the effect — the policy in question doesn’t exist.
The county then looked to the Montana Supreme Court for clarification on the issue, filing a petition for relief on May 1. Three days later, on May 4, Knudsen sent a letter telling Gallatin County to drop the petition to the supreme court.
“You are hereby ordered and directed to dismiss this matter immediately,” Knudsen’s May 4 letter reads. “The Gallatin County Attorney’s Office is further directed to terminate its representation agreement with the Graybill Law Firm.”
As part of the ongoing controversy, Cromwell hired the Graybill Law Firm to represent her and assist her in the appeal to the Montana Supreme Court. The law firm continues to represent Cromwell, they confirmed on Tuesday.
The controversy stems from how Gallatin County interacts with federal immigration officials, especially Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Last year, ICE requested confidential criminal justice information from Gallatin County. The county said ICE was acting in a civil capacity when they requested it, not as a law enforcement agency.
For that reason, the county attorney’s office said ICE had to go through a separate procedure to obtain the information it wanted since the Montana Constitution guarantees a right to privacy. Knudsen has said ICE is a law enforcement agency in all contexts –civil and criminal — under the law and directed Cromwell to issue a memo saying that.
“I respectfully request that you immediately recognize ICE in toto as a criminal justice agency in accordance with state law,” an April 23 letter from Knudsen to Cromwell reads.
Cromwell has brought up Montana’s right to privacy in a series of letters that have been sent between the two. She has also requested a clarification from Knudsen’s office via advisory opinion, an option which Knudsen has as the Attorney General of Montana.
Advisory opinions are written by the Attorney General’s Office and have the force of case law until a court decides a legal question. The Attorney General can issue an advisory opinion on any matter of law, if requested by a public official or he chooses. However, he is not mandated to issue one.
So far, Knudsen has rebuffed Cromwell’s requests.
Graybill responded to Knudsen’s order for Cromwell to withdraw her legal challenge to the takeover of the office. Included in that appeal to Montana’s highest court is the legal question of whether the right-to-privacy extends to criminal justice data and federal authorities.
“(The Supreme Court petition) raises, among other issues, the lawfulness of your decision to assert supervisory control over County Attorney Cromwell’s office,” a May 4 letter from the law firm to Knudsen reads. “That question is now before the Montana Supreme Court, which will decide whether to exercise its jurisdiction. This office is unaware of any authority stating that an Attorney General’s decision to invoke supervisory control under § 2-15-501(5), MCA, is immune from judicial review.”
Knudsen is a right-wing extremist who wants everyone to think and live like he does.