DC Leaders for Rule of Law

Former D.C. Bar Presidents, Disciplinary Officials, and other Bar Leaders File Amicus Brief Supporting Disciplinary System and Rule of Law as Applied to Government Lawyers

On July 16, 2026, 85 present and former leaders of the bar in the Nation’s capital, along with 7 of the District of Columbia’s voluntary bar associations, filed an amicus brief in the United States District Court in a case posing a direct challenge to the integrity of the legal profession and the rule of law as it applies to government lawyers.

The group of amici curiae explain:

“Amici share a profound concern that the DOJ’s frontal attack on the application of professional standards…threatens to erode the integrity of the courts and the legal profession in the District of Columbia and elsewhere. The DOJ’s theories are constitutionally unsound, conflict with an explicit federal statute, and would effectively sanction and, indeed, encourage unethical conduct by insulating it from review.”

In May, the Department of Justice, headed by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, filed a complaint in the District Court against five defendants including the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, the D.C. Board on Professional Responsibility and the District of Columbia Disciplinary Counsel. In this extraordinary challenge, the Justice Department seeks to stop the Court and other disciplinary system officials from proceeding with an ethics complaint against former Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Clark, a member of the D.C. Bar.

The Justice Department alleges that that State and D.C. Bar authorities are constitution-ally barred from investigating unethical conduct by Justice Department lawyers.

This is a frontal attack on the traditional understanding that all members of the bar are held to the same standards regardless of their employment affiliation.

The signers included former presidents, officers, governors and executive staff of the District of Columbia Bar, along with former District of Columbia disciplinary and ethics officials and former presidents of several voluntary bar associations in the District.  Additionally, seven District voluntary bar associations signed the brief as organizations.

The brief explains that enforcement of professional ethics is profoundly important and the Justice Department’s arguments are unsound for the following reasons:

• From colonial times, the regulation of the legal profession has always been a matter for the courts of the various States and the District of Columbia. The Supreme Court has repeatedly confirmed this allocation of authority.

• In 1998, Congress amended the Judicial Code explicitly providing that all federal government attorneys must be members of the bar of a State or the District of Columbia and are to be subject to their ethics rules “to the same extent and in the same manner as other attorneys” licensed by those jurisdictions.

• These longstanding rules of professional conduct are equally enforceable against all members of the D.C. Bar, regardless of the identity of their employer.

• Government lawyers should not be exempted from the standards that apply to all other members of the bar.

• Unique presidential immunity does not excuse unethical conduct by Department of Justice lawyers.

The signers share deep concerns about the DOJ’s arguments. If accepted, they would erode the integrity and independence of the courts and undermine the public’s confidence in the legal profession and our system of justice.

The 85 individual amici included 59 former D.C. Bar and Disciplinary System leaders and 26 past leaders of District of Columbia voluntary bar associations. Many of the amici have also previously served as lawyers for the Department of Justice.

Voluntary bar associations joining were the Bar Association of the District of Columbia, Hispanic Bar Association of D.C., Metropolitan Washington Employment Lawyers Association, National Bar Association, Trial Lawyers Association of Metropolitan Washington, Washington Council of Lawyers and the Women’s Bar Association of the District of Columbia. A full list of signers is attached to the brief.

Read the amicus brief