Posted on 03/13/2026 6:30:15 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Federal lawyers cannot be held hostage by a lawfare apparatus that threatens their destruction for daring to represent GOP administrations.
On Tuesday, word came that the legal disciplinary authority in Washington, D.C., was charging U.S. Pardon Attorney Ed Martin with ethics violations, kicking off proceedings that could result in penalties up to and including disbarment.
Martin himself had questioned that very Disciplinary Counsel, Hamilton P. Fox III, the former head of the D.C. Board on Professional Responsibility, about whether his tribunal was operating politically in correspondence from February 2025. Martin wrote a letter to Fox then, suggesting that the Democrat-dominated panel might be targeting those with opposing viewpoints with unmerited ethics probes and seeking information to ascertain whether it was true. On Tuesday, word came that the legal disciplinary authority in Washington, D.C., was charging U.S. Pardon Attorney Ed Martin with ethics violations, kicking off proceedings that could result in penalties up to and including disbarment.
In so doing, it might have just helped make the case for the action the Trump Justice Department recently initiated to begin to combat the weaponization of such bar disciplinary tribunals — namely, against conservatives.
The D.C. Board on Professional Responsibility alleges that while serving as U.S. attorney last year, Martin — a conservative stalwart long loathed by the left — violated local rules of legal conduct in probing Georgetown Law School for its alleged continued promotion of DEI in its curriculum, and refusing to hire those affiliated with the school until it purged DEI accordingly.
“Lawfare/Barfare is alive & well,” said Jeff Clark, the recently departed chief Trump administration regulatory officer. “Apparently, DC’s Disciplinary Counsel cares not that 1) DEI is an unconstitutional violation of equal...
(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
Barffare -—— heh, heh, heh...
good, time to focus on the American ‘British Accreditation Regency’ BAR Association.
and, restore the original 13th amendment while your at it.
It's the accreditation system is where we should start.
RIP Barefoot Bob.
I am not a lawyer, but just who gave this entity (bar association) this much power, or how did they gain it? The red states ought to take over everything they do vis-a-vis accreditation, and whatever else they do, and tell them to eff off.
how many did they kill to keep it?
The bar is a private organization that answers to no one but the liberals that run it....
Congress establishes the procedural rules for federal courts, which control things like admission to practice. Those rules themselves delegate that authority to the individual district courts. State courts control admissions to practice in each state. That is NOT the same as belonging to a bar association, which is voluntary. So it is actually the courts that have the power.
However, very often, those courts will delegate to those private bar associations the management of investigations and complaints. Or at least the "first crack" at them. They then send their findings and recommendations to the relevant court, which makes the ultimate decision on claims of misconduct and punishment.
As a practical matter, even though those bar associations don't have the power to take away a license to practice, the investigatory process and recommendations are something no lawyer wants to face.
Nobody can do anything about it because they are afraid of being called racist by the news media.
I am wondering why Bondi keeps him there. He is a Democrat who hates Martin and has stalled other cases.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.