Unsealed documents show that two unidentified University of Louisville OB/GYNs who worked part-time at the EMW Women’s Surgical Center fought against disclosing their personal employment records to then-Republican Attorney General Daniel Cameron.
The physicians provided abortion care at the now closed surgical center. The investigation took place as Cameron was running for governor against Democrat Gov. Andy Beshear, in which abortion was a key issue.
The Kentucky Lantern previously reported details of the case which the Lantern and Louisville Public Media sued to unseal.
A circuit judge and court of appeals judge ruled in favor of the doctors. Both agree that Cameron did not have the authority to investigate the doctors and that the subpoena amounted to a “fishing expedition.”
The doctors’ lawyers said the attorney general is “not a roving crime fighter,” and does not have the ability to intervene in matters outside his jurisdiction. That’s because both doctors and the EMW clinic operated only in Jefferson County and Cameron asked for the grand jury subpoena in Franklin County.
They claimed Cameron’s political ambitions motivated the subpoena, rather than evidence of wrongdoing.
“Those documents would provide Mr. Cameron with the information he was denied in the civil case, and it would support his anti-abortion political platform, but it would not further any legitimate criminal investigation,” the doctors’ lawyers argued.
Cameron first tried to get the information through civil litigation before the grand jury subpoena. Even with nearly all records unsealed, it is unclear what crime Cameron was investigating. Franklin Circuit Court Judge Phillip Shepherd ruled that only one document would be excluded: the one in which Cameron explained the possible criminal activity he said he was investigating.
The document itself may not be public, but Shepherd did discuss the document in his decision, saying it “failed to provide any legal precedent that would support a criminal prosecution.”
“In short, the information sought in this subpoena appears to be a classic ‘fishing expedition,’” Shepherd wrote in his order, ruling in favor of quashing Cameron’s subpoena.
Initially, the doctors said Cameron was seeking the records to try and show they had used public dollars to perform abortions (EMW was a private clinic), which is in violation of state law.
However, in court filings Cameron said that was not the reason he had issued the grand jury subpoena, instead referencing some unnamed misuse of public funds. Cameron also firmly denied any political motivations in the grand jury investigation.
However, Shepherd acknowledged political incentives could be at play as he addressed the doctor’s fears that their names could be publicly leaked and their position used as political fodder.
“The Petitioners have a right to be concerned that the information produced by this Grand Jury proceeding could be … used in a way that would damage their reputations or subject them to vilification or harassment by opponents of abortion,” Shepherd wrote. “This concern is heightened by the undisputed fact that the Attorney General has made his opposition to abortion a cornerstone of his political campaigns and programs.”
This isn’t the first time the judicial system has accused Cameron of misusing a grand jury. Three grand jurors from the Breonna Taylor case filed an impeachment petition against him alleging that he misled the public and misused funds in that case.
Shepherd’s decision was also upheld by Court of Appeals judge Pamela Goodwine, who is now running for Kentucky Supreme Court and has won the endorsement of Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear.
Current Attorney General Russell Coleman decided not to appeal the appeals court’s ruling, and the case was referred back to Shepherd to decide whether to unseal the case.
State government and politics reporting is supported in part by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
