In Re Subpoena Issued to United States Department of Interior, United States Park Police

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: June 26, 2026
• Docket: Misc. No. 2025-0143
• Status: Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF IN- TERIOR, UNITED STATES PARK POLICE,

Petitioner, Misc. Action No. 25-143 (TJK) v.

SHAYLYN LEWIS,

Respondent.

MEMORANDUM

Shaylyn Lewis was “involved in a motor vehicle collision” back in August 2022. ECF No.

8-1 at 20. Lewis sued the occupants of the other vehicle in the Superior Court of the District of

Columbia. See Lewis v. Salauddin, No. 2024-CAB-000612 (D.C. Super. Ct. Jan. 30, 2024). To

aid her underlying personal injury lawsuit, Lewis sought bodycam footage, audio recordings, and

written reports potentially related to her accident from the United States Park Police, a federal

agency that is not a party to the lawsuit but whose officers responded to the accident. See ECF

No. 8 at 1. At her request, the Superior Court issued a subpoena on the Park Police, compelling

the agency to produce the requested records. See ECF No. 1. The Park Police removed the sub-

poena to this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1) and now asks this Court to quash it. Id. The

removal of the subpoena was proper, and this Court has jurisdiction to consider the Park Police’s

motion. See In re Subpoena In Collins, 524 F.3d 249, 251 (D.C. Cir. 2008). Because the Park

Police is shielded by sovereign immunity from subpoenas issued in Superior Court, the Court will

grant the Park Police’s motion to quash.

The Superior Court for the District of Columbia is considered a “State Court” when issuing

subpoenas. 28 U.S.C § 1451; see In re Subpoena In Collins, 524 F.3d at 251. And the D.C. Circuit has long held that a “state subpoena commanding a federal agency to produce its records . . . vio-

lates federal sovereign immunity.” In re Subpoena In Collins, 524 F.3d at 251 (citing Houston

Bus. J., Inc. v. Office of Comptroller of the Currency, 86 F.3d 1208, 1211 (D.C. Cir. 1996)). Sub-

poenas issued in Superior Court against federal agencies should therefore be quashed, as the Su-

perior Court has no jurisdiction to enforce them. Id.; see also FDIC v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 475

(1994) (“Sovereign immunity is jurisdictional in nature.”).

In opposition, Lewis contends that the D.C. Circuit has stated that “federal agencies cannot

. . . claim sovereign immunity to avoid compliance with third party subpoenas.” ECF No. 8 at 3

(quoting Linder v. Calero-Portocarrero, 251 F.3d 178, 180 (D.C. Cir. 2001)). But Lewis takes

that language out of context. Linder held only that “sovereign immunity does not insulate the

federal government from complying with a [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure] Rule 45 subpoena,”

which is a subpoena issued in “federal court.” Linder, 251 F.3d at 181 (emphasis added). And

how a subpoena is treated “varies depending on whether the underlying litigation is in federal or

in state court.” Houston Bus. J., Inc., 86 F.3d at 1211. “In federal court, the federal government

has waived its sovereign immunity,” and so “[a] federal-court litigant . . . can seek to obtain the

production of documents from a federal agency by means of a federal subpoena.” Id. at 1212

(citing 5 U.S.C. § 702). But none of this is so when the subpoena arises out of litigation in state

court, which is why an agency facing a state-court subpoena may “remove the subpoena to district

court and assert sovereign immunity as a defense.” In re Subpoena In Collins, 524 F.3d at 251.

As explained, the subpoena here was issued not in federal court, but in Superior Court, which is a

state court for these purposes.

For all these reasons, the Court will grant the Motion to Quash, ECF No. 7. A separate

2 order will issue.1

/s/ Timothy J. Kelly TIMOTHY J. KELLY United States District Judge Date: June 26, 2026

1 In her opposition to the Park Police’s motion to quash, Lewis mentions in passing that her “Motion for Civil Contempt should be granted because the Department of Interior failed to comply with a court order.” ECF No. 8 at 5. But there is no such motion pending before this Court. In fact, Lewis filed her “Motion for Civil Contempt” “[o]n September 5, 2025” in Superior Court. Id. And that court denied the motion as moot after the Park Police removed the subpoena here. See ECF No. 5-1 (Superior Court order).