ODC Office of Disciplinary Counsel
---
SEE DISBAR ABA DISCIPLINARY ETHICS ED FUCKING MARTIN 3 26
an3 26
Outgoing "weaponization" chief Ed Martin was supposed to have left the Justice Department sometime in February after Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche "made moves to significantly limit Martin’s ability to wield power," CNN reported at the time. Now, Martin is facing an ethics investigation.
"On his way out the door from the U.S. attorney's office, [Martin] announced to his entire staff that he was under investigation by the D.C. Office of Disciplinary Counsel without elaborating on the details, CBS News reported Tuesday. According to the report, Martin is facing ethics charges after he sent a letter to the Georgetown University Law Center alleging that a whistleblower reported them for teaching "diversity, equity, and inclusion."
Martin's Feb. 17, 2025, letter made the allegations, but before he heard a response, he said he would impose sanctions on Georgetown by telling his staff not to hire any students from the school.
Now-former dean, William Treanor, responded in a letter challenging Martin's Catholic faith, saying it was "an attack on the University's mission as a Jesuit and Catholic institution."
A filing revealed Tuesday shows Disciplinary Counsel Hamilton "Phil" Fox III of the D.C. Bar alleged on Friday that while working for the federal government, Martin violated the First and Fifth Amendments with his letter. "Mr. Martin knew or should have known" that.
"Acting in his official capacity and speaking on behalf of the government, he used coercion to punish or suppress a disfavored viewpoint, the teaching and promotion of DEI," the court filing says. "He demanded that Georgetown Law relinquish its free speech and religious rights in order to obtain a benefit, employment opportunities for its students."
The filing goes on to say that Martin replied to the exchange, "stating that he would not be responding to Disciplinary Counsel’s inquiry, complained about Disciplinary Counsel’s 'uneven behavior' and requested a 'face-to-face meeting with all of you to discuss this matter and find a way forward.' He copied the White House Counsel 'for informational purposes because of the importance of getting this issue addressed.'"
Technology lawyer Kendra Albert mocked on BlueSky that Martin's comments in count two had "I want to speak to your manager" energy.
Lawfare's senior editor, Roger Parloff, called the comments from Martin, "very Ed Martin-y." He noted that after the D.C. Bar Association began its inquiry, "Martin [wrote] Chief Judge of D.C. Court of Appeals three times." He was warned not to on two occasions and did so anyway.
The first letter was sent to the judge ex parte, meaning it did not inform the opposing counsel.
Slate legal analyst Mark Joseph Stern suggested this is one of many reasons Attorney General Pam Bondi is going after state Bar Associations for filing ethics complaints.
---
===
RWW ==>
After launching investigations, Ed Martin is suddenly facing an investigation of his own
The hyper-partisan “Stop the Steal” activist is confronting a disciplinary investigation that could threaten his law license.
May 15, 2025,
By Steve Benen
It’s been quite a week for Ed Martin. A week ago, the hyper-partisan lawyer whom Donald Trump appointed to serve as the U.S. attorney in Washington, D.C., received some unwelcome news: Martin’s prosecutorial nomination, the president grudgingly conceded, was dead. The bipartisan opposition to the “Stop the Steal” activist in the Senate was simply too much to overcome.
Soon after, however, Martin learned that he’d land on his feet: Trump said the Missouri Republican would lead the Justice Department’s new “Weaponization Working Group” — tackling a problem that only exists in the minds of Republican conspiracy theorists — and serve as the DOJ’s new pardon attorney, succeeding Elizabeth Oyer, who was fired in March allegedly after she refused to sign off on a plan to restore Mel Gibson’s gun rights.
A few days later, Martin announced at a press conference that he intended to use his new working group to “name” and “shame” individuals the Justice Department determines it is unable to charge with crimes. In other words, federal law enforcement officials might investigate suspects, only to discover that the suspects didn’t break any laws.
At that point, according to Martin, his working group will take steps to smear these Americans publicly anyway — which, as an NBC News report noted, “would amount to a major departure from longstanding Justice Department protocols.”
But if that weren’t quite enough, as NBC News also reported, Martin learned this past week that he’s facing an investigation of his own.
The incoming director of the Justice Department’s ‘Weaponization Working Group’ revealed Wednesday he was under investigation by D.C.’s Office of Disciplinary Counsel, accusing the official in charge of investigating bar complaints of ‘weaponizing’ his role, according to an letter viewed by NBC News.
The disciplinary counsel’s probe didn’t come out of nowhere. On the contrary, in early March, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee formally requested that the group that governs the legal bar in the District of Columbia investigate Martin, insisting that he’d “abused” his prosecutorial powers — a claim rooted in extensive evidence.
They weren’t alone. In April, a group of former Jan. 6 prosecutors and conservative attorneys also sought a disciplinary investigation into Martin from the Office of Disciplinary Counsel at the U.S. District Court of Appeals, arguing the Republican activist had demonstrated a “fundamental misunderstanding of the role of a federal prosecutor.”
For his part, Martin condemned the investigation he’s facing in a going-away email to former colleagues in the U.S. attorney’s office, calling the probe “an outrage.” True to form, Martin proceeded to complain that Disciplinary Counsel Hamilton P. “Phil” Fox III, who serves as chief prosecutor for disciplinary matters for attorneys who are members of the D.C. Bar, was “weaponizing his role.”
Or put another way, when Martin is targeting his perceived political foes, he’s combatting “weaponization.” When Martin is being held accountable for his alleged abuses, he’s the victim of “weaponization.”
Time will tell what, if anything, comes of the investigation, but in a worst-case scenario, the disciplinary probe could result in Martin losing his law license in the nation’s capital.
---