Blog
How Federal Agencies Share Grand Jury Subpoena Information
When a federal grand jury investigation is underway, federal prosecutors have the power to issue subpoenas to obtain documents and testimony relevant to the investigation. Grand jury subpoenas are an important investigative tool that allows prosecutors to gather evidence and determine if there is probable cause to bring charges against a suspect.
While grand jury proceedings are conducted in secret, federal agencies often need to share information obtained through grand jury subpoenas in order to conduct investigations effectively. There are rules and procedures in place to balance the need for secrecy with the need for coordination among agencies.
What is a federal grand jury?
A federal grand jury is a group of 16 to 23 citizens who are tasked with determining if there is probable cause to believe a crime has been committed and to bring charges against the suspect through an indictment. The grand jury does not determine guilt or innocence – that is left to the trial jury if charges are brought.
Federal grand juries have broad investigative powers. They can issue subpoenas demanding documents, physical evidence or witness testimony. Grand juries operate in secret so witnesses can speak freely without fear of retaliation or harm to reputations in case no indictment is brought.
Why is grand jury secrecy important?
There are several key reasons grand jury proceedings are kept secret:
- Protect the reputations of suspects who may be under investigation but ultimately are not charged if the grand jury does not find probable cause.
- Prevent suspects from being tipped off so they cannot tamper with evidence or coordinate false testimony.
- Encourage witness cooperation by protecting them from retaliation, intimidation or harm.
- Prevent public confusion if information about an ongoing investigation is revealed before charges are filed.
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e) codifies the rules around grand jury secrecy. All grand jurors, interpreters, court reporters, attorneys and other personnel involved in the proceedings must keep everything related to the grand jury secret unless specifically authorized by a court order.
While grand jury proceedings are secret, sometimes information obtained through the grand jury needs to be shared with other federal agencies involved in an investigation. For example, if a grand jury subpoena turns up evidence of tax fraud, that information may need to be shared with the IRS. Or if terrorism is suspected, the FBI may need access to testimony and documents.
Rule 6(e) does allow for sharing of grand jury information under certain circumstances and following certain procedures:
- Prosecutors may share information with other federal grand juries investigating the same issue or related matters.
- Prosecutors may share information with other government attorneys and assistants involved in enforcing federal criminal law.
- Information may be shared with law enforcement personnel as needed to assist prosecutors with the investigation.
- Upon court order, information may be shared for reasons of national security or to investigate threats against grand jurors or witnesses.
- Upon court order, information may be shared with state or Indian tribal officials if it reveals a violation of state criminal law.
However, prosecutors cannot just freely share grand jury information with other agencies. Specific procedures must be followed, such as obtaining a court order or establishing a need related to federal law enforcement. Records related to grand jury proceedings must remain sealed unless a specific exception applies.
Challenges of sharing grand jury information
While sharing grand jury information among federal agencies is sometimes necessary, it also poses challenges:
- Other agencies may try to use grand jury information for purposes unrelated to the criminal investigation.
- Information could be mishandled or leaked publicly.
- Suspects may accuse the government of misusing information.
- Coordination among agencies can slow down the investigation.
- Turf wars could emerge over who controls information.
To balance these concerns, prosecutors are advised to consider alternatives before issuing subpoenas, only share what is truly necessary, and bring subpoenaed records before the grand jury so jurors can determine what is relevant.
Courts also scrutinize requests to share grand jury information to ensure proper procedures are followed. For example, the IRS has strict internal rules governing when its agents can access grand jury information from another agency.
Grand jury subpoenas vs other investigative tools
In addition to grand jury subpoenas, federal prosecutors have other tools they can use to obtain information for investigations that don’t involve grand juries at all. These include:
- Search warrants – these allow law enforcement to enter and search property with court approval.
- Administrative subpoenas – federal agencies can issue these directly without court involvement.
- Witness interviews – prosecutors can meet with witnesses and suspects voluntarily to gather information.
- Undercover operations – these secretly gather information without tipping off suspects.
However, grand jury subpoenas have some advantages like being able to compel testimony and impose penalties if the subpoena is ignored. But they also come with the challenges of maintaining secrecy. Prosecutors weigh the pros and cons of the different investigative tools when building a case.
Key takeaways
- Federal grand jury proceedings are conducted in secret to protect the integrity of investigations.
- However, sometimes grand jury information needs to be shared across federal agencies.
- Rule 6(e) allows sharing in certain circumstances but procedures must be followed.
- Courts and agencies scrutinize requests to share information to prevent misuse.
- Prosecutors also have other investigative tools besides grand jury subpoenas.
Balancing secrecy with coordination is an ongoing challenge in federal law enforcement. But following proper protocols allows agencies to conduct more effective investigations while maintaining judicial oversight over the grand jury process.