An attorney disciplinary action against former U.S. Justice Department lawyer Jeffrey Clark is progressing despite his objections to pausing the proceeding while he pursues an appeal. While working in the Justice Department, Clark is facing disciplinary charges related to his efforts to overturn former President Donald Trump’s 2020 election loss. On Wednesday, a District of Columbia professional responsibility board ordered a conference on July 12 to set a hearing schedule for the case.
In June, U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras ruled that the D.C. Office of Disciplinary Counsel could proceed with the case, rejecting Clark’s argument that it lacked jurisdiction. Clark appealed Contreras’ ruling and requested a stay on his case during the appeal process. However, the D.C. Court of Appeals’ professional responsibility board denied his request, stating that Contreras’ ruling did not warrant pausing the case.
The D.C. Office of Disciplinary Counsel has asserted that Clark’s case is ready for a hearing “as soon as possible after Labor Day,” according to the professional responsibility board. Meanwhile, Clark’s spokesperson, Rachel Semmel, criticized the case brought by the D.C. Bar, calling it “unconstitutional” and claiming it sought to invade “confidential deliberations amongst the president and his legal advisors, like Mr. Clark.” Clark’s lawyer previously characterized the ethics case as a “flagrant misuse” of the bar’s disciplinary function and warned of the potential dangerous precedent it could set.
The ethics charges filed against Clark last year by the D.C. Office of Disciplinary Counsel allege that he attempted to “engage in conduct involving dishonesty” and took actions “that would seriously interfere with the administration of justice.” The charges focus on Clark’s efforts to pressure then-Acting Attorney General Jeff Rosen and Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue to initiate investigations in Georgia based on President Trump’s unsubstantiated claims of voting fraud.
The D.C. Bar has not disclosed the specific sanctions it seeks against Clark, but they could range from suspension to disbarment. Final decisions regarding disciplinary matters involving Washington attorneys rest with the D.C. Court of Appeals.
This case has drawn significant attention due to its implications for attorney ethics and the accountability of legal professionals involved in high-profile political events. Critics argue that Clark’s alleged actions threaten the integrity of the justice system and raise concerns about the role of lawyers in perpetuating baseless claims. Supporters of Clark maintain that he acted within the scope of his professional duties and that pursuing disciplinary action against him infringes upon confidential communications between attorneys and their clients.
As the case moves forward, legal experts and observers await further developments and the ultimate decision of the D.C. Court of Appeals. The outcome of this disciplinary action will likely have implications for the legal profession and may set a precedent for future cases involving attorneys and their involvement in politically charged matters.
Don’t be a silent ninja! Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.