‘No policy to rescind’: County Attorney Audrey Cromwell stands firm against AG Knudsen's deadline

Reiterating that she has no policy to rescind, Gallatin County Attorney Audrey Cromwell is standing firm on her April 6 counter-demand that Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen “fulfill his statutory duty” by issuing a formal legal opinion on their interagency rift.

Cromwell formerly responded Monday to Knudsen, who had given until the same day to rescind what he views as her office declining to recognize U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement as a criminal justice agency. Knudsen’s office warned in a letter Thursday morning that he would take “control” if she didn’t reverse course.

Cromwell’s response is the fourth rebuke between the two elected officials.

“The legal issue raised by the attorney general is not about personalities or partisan politics,” Cromwell, a Democrat, told the Chronicle. “It is about adherence to the rule of law, respect for constitutional rights, and the proper roles of our respective offices.”

Knudsen, a Republican, has received Cromwell’s response, his office told the Chronicle.

“We have received the letter and are reviewing it to determine next steps,” said Chase Scheuer, Knudsen’s deputy communications director.

Cromwell affirmed she is not honoring Knudsen’s request until he issues an opinion. She said her office has no official ICE information-sharing policy to rescind.

“To be clear: My office does not have a formal or informal policy, rule, or order regarding the sharing of information with ICE,” Cromwell said again, this time referencing “a sworn affidavit” as proof.

Knudsen views the situation differently. He says Cromwell’s office did inform immigration officials it does not legally recognize ICE as a law-enforcement agency entitled to confidential criminal justice information. That was in an October 2025 email from her assistant, Jack Veil.

“I am writing to inform you that the Gallatin County Attorney’s Office does not legally recognize Immigration and Customs Enforcement as a law enforcement agency entitled to receive CCJI,” Veil wrote.

The MTDOJ waited until last week to send a cease-and-desist letter demanding Cromwell rescind an “unlawful” policy.

“ICE may be deemed a criminal justice agency under Montana law in some contexts,” Cromwell said. “Last October 2025 (ICE) was acting for a civil purpose, not a criminal one.”

Veil’s communication is not and does not establish policy, which is set by the County Commission, per Cromwell.

Cromwell continues to argue under Montana law, confidential criminal justice information cannot be disseminated for civil or administrative purposes absent express statutory authorization, meaning sharing confidential information for a civil investigation without a court order is prohibited. Cromwell reiterated the request did not involve the investigation or prosecution of criminal offenses but was instead for a civil investigation — a federal administrative function.

“I want to be clear: It was not a denial of access,” Cromwell said. It was adherence to the rule of Montana law. ICE was free to follow up and request a court order, as is their prerogative.”

Knudsen declined Cromwell’s legal opinion request last week.

“The time to request a legal opinion was before issuing a communicae that ICE is not always criminal justice agency,” he wrote her.

Cromwell called Knudsen’s refusal surprising, saying it “departs from 125 years of Montana precedent and leaves a significant legal question unresolved for all county attorneys across the state.”

Montana’s attorney general is required to provide written legal opinions to county attorneys, officials and the Legislature regarding questions of law, serving as an authoritative, non-judicial interpretation of legal duties. These opinions are intended for guidance rather than public disputes, according to the Montana Legislature.

Despite their differences, Cromwell invoked similarities between her office and Knudsen’s.

“My sole concern is to follow the law,” she said. “As sworn constitutional officers, the aAttorney general and I are bound to uphold both the United States Constitution and the Montana Constitution, including Montana’s explicit and heightened right to privacy,” she said. “That obligation necessarily governs how criminal justice information is handled and disclosed within our state and between agencies.”

Cromwell reiterated her April 6 request for a formal opinion, noting a July 6 statutory deadline for Knudsen.

“I remain prepared to follow a lawful and authoritative interpretation from the attorney general’s office, but until then, I will continue to apply the statute as written,” Cromwell said.