State bar association declines to discipline extremist former lawmaker Matt Shea over Malheur incident, citing ‘constitutional scrutiny’

The Washington State Bar Association has dismissed a grievance filed against former Washington lawmaker Matthew Shea after he was alleged to have planned and participated in political violence, citing “constitutional scrutiny.”

The dismissal, which came in February and was later affirmed in May, rested on Shea’s freedom of speech and lack of any criminal charges following a 2019 independent investigation spearheaded by the Washington House of Representatives. The 2019 investigation concluded his actions in the armed takeover of an Oregon wildlife refuge in 2016 amounted to “an act of domestic terrorism against the United States.” In response, he was stripped of leadership roles in the House and leaders in both parties called for him to resign.

Shea led a group of lawmakers to the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, where Nevada rancher and anti-government militant Ammon Bundy and other armed protesters were involved in a standoff with federal officials.

Shea said at the time they made the trip to help negotiate a peaceful resolution to the standoff; local officials said they had asked the legislators to stay away. Shea also distributed a four-page manifesto in 2018 titled “Biblical Basis for War,” which describes the Christian God as a “warrior,” condemns abortion and same-sex marriage, and advocates for killing men who don’t subscribe to biblical law.

Washington attorney Robert Shirley filed a grievance with the state bar against Shea shortly after the investigation’s report was released. He doesn’t know Shea, he said, but felt compelled to file the grievance that accused Shea of violating a lawyer’s professional misconduct by “disregard of the rule of law.”

Nearly five years later, the bar’s disciplinary counsel wrote back to Shirley in February that they would be taking no further action.

Shea posted this letter on social media last week, writing the accusations against him were false and “the truth has now caught up” four years later.

“Our country cannot long endure civic debate being replaced with political opponents falsely implying those they disagree with are criminals, terrorists or worse,” Shea wrote. “I do not harbor bitterness and I forgive those who tried to destroy me.”

Shea did not respond to requests for comment Monday.

In the grievance, Shirley cites the investigation’s report and alleges three things he attributes to disregarding the rule of law: that Shea spoke in support of defying a federal court order in 2014 from the Bureau of Land Management, which led to a standoff in Bunkerville, Nevada; that Shea interfered with the Department of Veterans Affairs to try and prevent them from taking weapons from at-risk patients; and that he participated in at least four events during the Malheur standoff.

Shirley’s grievance was deferred three years to allow time for any potential criminal investigation “to come to fruition,” the bar’s disciplinary counsel wrote. The grievance was opened again last year because enough time had passed without Shea being charged with any crimes, the February dismissal states.

“To the best of our knowledge, no criminal charges have been brought against Shea for any of the conduct described,” which would violate the code of conduct, the decision said.

Shea is still practicing, according to the bar’s website.

While lawyers are afforded freedom of speech, they have some restrictions based on the code of conduct, the bar wrote. In this case, Shea’s comments weren’t inside a courtroom, so “the weight of the state’s interest in regulating the legal profession diminishes,” the disciplinary counsel wrote, and “we believe it unlikely that an ethics charge based on the (investigation report) would survive the requisite constitutional scrutiny.”

But if Shea is ever charged with a crime related to anything described in the investigation’s report, the bar will re-open Shirley’s grievance, the decision said.

Shirley, unsatisfied with the bar’s decision on the matter, appealed earlier this year. In May, the counsel sent back a letter stating they affirmed the former decision and Shirley could not appeal for a second time.

Shirley argues that laws are reviewed and revised all the time – this case should be one of them, he told The Spokesman-Review Monday.

“Is it really within the ethical boundaries of the Rules of Professional Conduct for an attorney to organize an armed mob to interfere with the lawful activities of a federal employee?” he wrote in an email. “The WSBA is letting down the public”

The report from the 2019 investigation into Shea said that leading up to the 2016 occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, Shea was among a group of state officials who participated in several “preplanning” phone calls with Bundy. Shea was operating as chairman of the Coalition of Western States, a group that included lawmakers from several other states, according to previous Spokesman-Review reporting. The report also described how Shea “authored and circulated an operations plan” for militia members to use during the standoff and how he sent one of his most trusted associates to participate.

The Washington State Bar Association also did not respond to requests for comment Monday.

Editor’s note — This story was corrected to clarify Shirley was not referring to “moral turpitude” or corruption cited in the law, but rather a general disregard of the law as referenced in the standards of professional conduct.