After years of mounting controversy over what many view as systemic violations of citizen grand jury rights, the Alaska Dept. of Law (DOL) announced that residents now have a more “accessible” and “transparent” process to request that an investigative grand jury probe suspected wrongdoing by public figures or public entities in Alaska.
In a July 15 announcement, the DOL said the goal of the new process is to “empower the community and ensure that public trust in government is maintained.”
The new process comes on the heels of controversial new grand jury rules that were created by the Alaska Supreme Court. According to the DOL new webpage for grand jury investigations, the DOL will assign attorneys to examine criteria to facilitate the convening of an investigative grand jury in situations where citizens present evidence on matters that jeopardize public welfare or safety.
Whether this arrangement will satisfy those who claim the grand jury has been commandeered by the very government authorities it is charged to investigate remains to be seen.
“The Alaska Constitution guarantees that an Investigative Grand Jury will have the authority to investigate matters of public welfare or safety, and that this right shall never be suspended,” Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor said in announcing the new DOL website. “This new, transparent process ensures that every Alaskan’s voice can be heard when it comes to safeguarding our community and holding our government accountable.”
In 2022, the Alaska Supreme Court issued an order – SCO 1993 – that amended Alaska Criminal Rules and specifically empowered the Alaska Attorney General to review requests by citizens to determine whether they should be presented to the court to convene an investigative grand jury. Previously, citizens could go directly to the grand jury without needing permission from the attorney general. This was seen as essential, because a key element of the investigative grand jury is to keep corrupt judges and powerful state officials accountable to the public.
Critics of the Supreme Court order noted that the new rules can easily be abused if citizens bring complaints against the Attorney General or the Dept. of Law, which is now the authorized gatekeeper over what cases can even go before a grand jury for consideration.
The DOL’s July 15 announcement touched on this controversy, noting that if an investigation involves alleged corruption within the Department of Law, the department will appoint what it deems to be a “neutral prosecutor” to work with the investigative grand jury.
Whether this arrangement will satisfy those who claim the grand jury has been commandeered by the government remains to be seen.
The DOL said the new guidance is aims to makes public feedback feasible, while creating a way for citizens to challenge the process if they wish to do so. While the new process is clearly not attempting to challenge the Alaska Supreme Court’s ruling that empowers the DOL to oversee grand jury investigations, it is an attempt to try and make the process more accessible and transparent.
Citizen grand juries are enshrined in the Alaska Constitution with the authority to investigate corrupt government officials by subpoenaing witnesses, examining documents, and taking testimony under oath to scrutinize issues that jeopardize public welfare or safety.
The new process only addresses the convening of Investigative Grand Juries, which investigate complaints of public welfare and safety brought by citizens. It does not pertain to criminal grand juries initiated by prosecutors or jurors under Criminal Rule 6, nor Investigative Grand Juries initiated by a grand juror.
Once convened, an Investigative Grand Jury can conduct a thorough investigation into systemic issues of public welfare or safety. When a grand jury determines that a public report is warranted, the report can help foster greater transparency and accountability within Alaska’s state government and public institutions. These reports, however, require judicial review before publication. This is another area of contention, as grand jury advocates have long maintained that the grand jury does not need permission to report its findings to the public. This requirement effectively stifles the ability of the grand jury to release its findings.
Alaska Grand Jurors Association has called on Gov. Mike Dunleavy to investigate alleged corruption within the DOL. So far, he has refused.
The Alaska Grand Jurors Association has worked for years to expose alleged government corruption and coverup when it comes to interfering with grand jury investigations of high profile government officials or judges. The association has held rallies, protests and letter writing campaigns in an ongoing attempt to empower citizen grand juries to freely and independently exercise their constitutional right to investigate illegal actions by judges and government officials without interference.
The movement has gained considerable traction over the past several years, and now includes a number of boroughs, mayors, lawmakers and many concerned citizens.
Alaska Grand Jurors Association has called on Gov. Mike Dunleavy to investigate alleged corruption within the DOL. So far, he has refused.
In February, David Haeg and several leaders from Alaska Grand Jurors Association met with high ranking officials in Alaska’s Department of Law. The meeting included Alaska Deputy Attorney General Cori Mills and Chief Assistant Attorney General Anne Helzer, who works directly under Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor in the Criminal Division.
Haeg, the grassroots leader of Alaska Grand Jury Rights, told the DOL officials that corrupt judges and government officials have been working in concert for many years to undercut the constitutional authority of citizen grand juries to investigate powerful public officials and judges freely and independently.
Listening via livestream during the February meeting were Kenai Borough Mayor Peter Micciche and Mat-Su Borough Mayor Edna DeVries, along with Jill Schaefer from Gov. Dunleavy’s Anchorage office.
ALASKA WATCHMAN DIRECT TO YOUR INBOX
Haeg aired a litany of alleged instances of corruption committed by the Alaska Supreme Court, the Alaska Judicial Council and members working in the Dept. of Law to undermine the power of grand juries to investigate these very same groups and individuals.
In particular, he highlighted the fact that, in 2022, a Kenai grand jury was in the process of investigating alleged corruption in the judicial branch and Department of Law, when the Alaska Supreme Court intervened with the new rule – SCO 1993 – for grand juries that effectively stifled their ability to launch independent investigations without being managed and controlled by the very branches of government they were intent on investigating.
In order to mitigate the impact of this ruling, and restore the power of citizen grand juries to investigate corrupt government officials, Haeg and his allies want Gov. Dunleavy to establish an independent citizen-led commission that can subpoena witnesses under oath, freely report their findings to the public and recommend prosecution – all freedoms that Alaska grand juries once enjoyed.
Without this action, the Department of Law will never regain the public’s confidence, Haeg said at the time. This is especially so, given that the Supreme Court’s new rules grant the Department of Law the veto authority to accept or reject requests to investigate corruption, even within their own ranks.
Attorney Mills told Haeg that the Dept. of Law never wanted the Supreme Court to empower them to decide which cases a grand jury can and cannot investigate.
10 Comments
If anyone believes Treg Taylor or Dunleavy, that person is in deep trouble. The whole issue needs an outside investigation.
REVOLUTION, REFORMATION, REVIVAL
Pray……………..PREPARE…………..PROCEED!!
I have already sat before both Taylor and dunleavy, with the little troll smolden in the room as well! I presented overwhelming evidence and documents to these bozos for over an hour, and nothing more than an empty promise of” will get back to you ” was given. WHICH THEY IN FACT DID NOT!
I am a whistle blower who was retaliated against and fired while working for DOL and DOC !
NOTHING TO BE ENCOURAGED BY HERE! THE CORRUPT BASTARDS CLUB REIGNS SUPREME!!!
VOTE DAVE MAXWELL FOR GOVERNOR!
You have my vote already.
It is unfortunate we did not convene a grand jury to investigate Ted Stevens, Don Young, Steven Dougherty, Bill Allen’s Veco and the Republican ” Corrupt Bastards Club ! Prosecutors may have had a real field day!
T.Y.
SCO 1993 is unconstitutional. Our State constitutional scholars have documented in writing their views of the rights of grand juries. State statutes reflect some of their thoughts. The Supreme Court can NOT invalidate state laws, nor set policy that goes contrary to the Constitutional authors intent. It is unlawful language if they do so. Period.
We all know how your roommate’s mom REALLY makes her money, and it’s not AT the laptop but ON the lap top.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Citizen Petitioners Respond to DOL’s New “Process” for Investigative Grand Jury Requests
Kenai, Alaska – July 17, 2025
Contact:
Edward D. Martin Jr.
(907) 252-7857 libertyedak@proton.me
Judicial Review Limits Free Speech & Accountability
Any grand jury report must undergo judicial approval before publication, effectively censoring findings. The Alaska Supreme Court’s Orders No. 1993 and No. 2000 mandate this review, which contradicts the constitutional requirement that grand jury reports be freely issued.
3. Structural Conflict of Interests Remains
Although the Department says it will appoint “neutral prosecutors” in cases involving itself, there is no protection when the AG’s Office or judiciary is being investigated. This continues the “fox guarding the henhouse” problem noted by DOL attorneys themselves.
Our Position & Call to Action
• We support more transparency, but transparency is not a substitute for constitutional compliance.
• Citizen-requested petitions must be delivered directly to the grand jury, without prior AG approval.
• Grand jury reports should be published without judicial filtering, restoring true power to the people.
• A truly independent commission—such as one proposed by the Alaska Grand Jurors Association—should be established to handle investigations involving the Department of Law or judiciary .
• We demand the immediate referral of our petition—already delayed for months—to the currently seated grand jury.
• We invite legislators, civic leaders, and concerned citizens to support legislation or resolutions reversing SCO 1993/2000, removing AG gatekeeping, and eliminating judicial pre-publication review.
• We urge the Department of Justice and federal authorities to review Alaska’s process for potential violations of citizens’ rights under the Alaska and U.S. Constitutions.
Endorsing Organizations & Individuals
• Edward D. Martin Jr., Betty Jo Moore, Scott Egger — Original Petitioners
• Alaska Grand Jurors Association — Advocates of constitutional grand jury rights
CITIZEN PETITION TO DEFEND THE GRAND JURY AND RESTORE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS IN ALASKA
To:
Alaska Legislators, Members of Congress, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the People of Alaska
From:
Edward D. Martin Jr., Betty Jo Moore, and Scott Egger
Kenai, Alaska
7/17/2025
Introduction
We, the undersigned, submit this formal demand for redress regarding the unlawful obstruction of citizen access to the grand jury process in Alaska. We urge the Alaska Legislature, members of Congress, and federal agencies to act swiftly in restoring constitutional grand jury powers, now suppressed through Supreme Court Orders No. 1993 and 2000, and enforced via the Department of Law’s Investigative Grand Jury FAQ.
We represent concerned Alaskans who have already filed a legitimate petition to convene an investigative grand jury into widespread violations of public office bonding laws and judicial misconduct. That petition—supported by statute, fact, and public interest—has not received the constitutionally required referral to a sitting grand jury.
I. The Grand Jury: A Constitutional Right, Not a Permission Slip
Article I, Section 8 of the Alaska Constitution declares:
“The power of grand juries to investigate and make recommendations concerning the public welfare or safety shall never be suspended.”
This language is absolute. The framers of Alaska’s Constitution intended the grand jury to be a people’s watchdog, able to investigate corruption in all branches of government independent of judicial or executive control.
Yet today, citizens are told that their petitions must be “screened” by the Attorney General, and that any resulting grand jury report must be “approved” by a judge before release. These procedural controls were imposed through SCO 1993 and SCO 2000, which are court rules—not constitutional amendments. They are therefore subordinate to the Constitution, and cannot suspend rights the Constitution says shall never be suspended.
II. Violations of Alaska and Federal Constitutional Rights
1. Alaska Constitution, Article I
§1–3: Inherent rights, civil rights, and source of government are rooted in the people—not the courts or the AG.
§6: The right to petition must be direct, not filtered through gatekeepers.
§7: Due process is denied when citizen grievances are never heard by a grand jury.
§8: The grand jury’s power to investigate “shall never be suspended.” Yet the Supreme Court has done just that.
2. Federal Constitutional Rights
First Amendment (U.S. Const.): The right “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” is being obstructed in Alaska when the AG and judiciary prevent access to grand juries.
Fourteenth Amendment – Due Process Clause: When the State fails to provide a fair and impartial means for public accountability, especially when the State itself is implicated, it violates procedural due process.
III. Supporting Case Law
Alaska Case Law
Breck v. Ulmer, 745 P.2d 66 (Alaska 1987):
“The Constitution of Alaska is more protective of individual rights than its federal counterpart.”
SCO 1993 and the FAQ diminish these protections.
Diment v. State, 248 P.3d 1016 (Alaska Ct. App. 2011):
“[The grand jury] belongs to the people… it is not an arm of the prosecution or the court.”
Current practice contradicts this holding.
State v. Murtagh, 169 P.3d 602 (Alaska 2007):
Emphasized the grand jury’s independent role in government oversight.
Federal Case Law
United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 (1992):
“The grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside.”
Ex parte Grossman, 267 U.S. 87 (1925):
Recognized the grand jury as a buffer between the people and government abuse.
Bond v. United States, 564 U.S. 211 (2011):
Citizens are the “masters of the Constitution,” not its subjects.
IV. Our Specific Demand
We demand that:
Our previously submitted grand jury petition be immediately referred to the currently seated grand jury, without AG or judicial interference.
The Alaska Legislature hold public hearings on SCO 1993 and SCO 2000 and their suppression of constitutional rights.
Congress and the U.S. Department of Justice investigate the systemic obstruction of the grand jury process in Alaska under color of law, in possible violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 18 U.S.C. § 241–242.
Conclusion: The People Are the Watchmen
The grand jury belongs to the people—not to the courts, not to the Department of Law, and not to those it may need to investigate. We are witnessing a coordinated administrative end-run around the Alaska Constitution, which if not corrected, will leave the people of Alaska with no peaceful means of oversight.
We ask those in authority to honor their oaths, not avoid them.
We also invite the people of Alaska and Americans nationwide to stand with us in defending what remains of our constitutional safeguards.
Final Note:
The constitutional guarantee is clear: “The power of grand juries to investigate and make recommendations concerning the public welfare or safety shall never be suspended.” It does not say “subject to AG approval” or “subject to judicial review.” Until Alaska’s processes reflect this, the power remains hollow.
“Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” —2 Corinthians 3:17
Seems dangerous.
.
What does that mean exactly, “examining broader issues related to public safety or governance when requested by citizens”?
.
What prevents radical Left activists from weaponizing the investigative grand jury against ordinary Alaskans?
.
What prevents government, school district, and labor union officials from weaponizing the investigative grand jury to suppress political dissent, taxpayer resistance, voter turnout by using the jury’s “authority to subpoena witnesses, review documents, and take testimony under oath”?
.
What prevents community councils in Anchorage, for example, from weaponizing the investigative grand jury against uncooperative neighbors?
.
Even government, school district, and labor union officials are citizens, so are they not entitled to request the jury “examinine broader issues related to public safety or governance” which hardened cynics might see as lawfare intended to make people shut up and behave or else?
.
Recall separation of powers? How does “examining broader issues related to public safety or governance” not turn the judicial system into a legislative body?
.
See where this goes, how it can snowball? Get everybody investigating everybody …subpoena-serving becomes the new cottage industry. Who outside the Ruling Class has time and money to do much of anything productive if they’re getting subpoenaed and lawfare’d by runaway investigative grand juries?
.
Can’t happen here, because …why, can’t it happen here, Treg?
I don’t have a pea-picking clue as to how any citizen could trust a government that says it’s to empower the community and ensure public trust in gov’t is maintained. when it has shown multitudinous times that it is not trustworthy. Good luck with that!