Dornan Subpoena Use Attacked

Attorneys for Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Garden Grove) battled in federal court Thursday over the legality of an 18-year-old law that allows her vanquished opponent to issue subpoenas in an effort to overturn her election.

William Kopeny, an attorney for Sanchez, said the Federal Contested Election Act is unconstitutional, because it has given U.S. District Judge Gary L. Taylor the authority to issue subpoenas on behalf of Robert K. Dornan, but no power to curb abuses from these summonses.

Lawyers for Sanchez and Hermandad Mexicana Nacional, the immigrant-rights group now being investigated for voter fraud, said subpoenas issued by Dornan seek documents involving clients of several nonprofit organizations.

If these subpoenas from Dornan were honored, the attorneys say, personal records of thousands of people would be improperly revealed, violating their privacy rights.

But some groups and individuals who sought to quash those subpoenas were told to file their objections with the House of Representatives in Washington, which is investigating Dornan’s complaint that voter fraud contributed to his defeat by fewer than 1,000 votes.

The allegation of voter fraud has focused on Hermandad. Dornan’s lawyers have used subpoenas from Taylor’s court to demand that Orange County district attorney investigators turn over documents seized during a raid on Hermandad’s office.

Hermandad’s attorney, Mark Rosen, told Taylor that Dornan was the first person to use the subpoena power since Congress passed the law in 1969.

He joined Kopeny in arguing that the law is unconstitutional.

“A court cannot issue an order and then be blind to its unconstitutional effects,” Kopeny said.

But William Hart, an attorney for Dornan, said he believed the law was “precise” and proper.

Taylor invited the lawyers to file additional arguments by Wednesday, saying that he would decide after considering them.