{"id":2606829,"date":"2026-05-26T07:38:02","date_gmt":"2026-05-26T11:38:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/doj-takes-on-leftist-attempt-to-punish-any-lawyer-who-disagrees-with-democrats\/"},"modified":"2026-05-26T07:41:48","modified_gmt":"2026-05-26T11:41:48","slug":"doj-takes-on-leftist-attempt-to-punish-any-lawyer-who-disagrees-with-democrats","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/doj-takes-on-leftist-attempt-to-punish-any-lawyer-who-disagrees-with-democrats\/","title":{"rendered":"DOJ Counters Left&#8217;s War On Lawyers Who Disagree With Dems"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">20<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fdoj-takes-on-leftist-attempt-to-punish-any-lawyer-who-disagrees-with-democrats%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2606829&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>The article says the U.S. Department of Justice has filed a major lawsuit against the Washington, D.C. bar disciplinary authorities in the case of former Trump DOJ official Jeffrey clark. It argues that Clark was pursued through \u201cbarfare\u201d (bar discipline used as political retaliation) for what the author characterizes as a controversial internal draft letter discussing potential 2020 election irregularities-despite Clark having relied on evidence he believed was relevant.<\/p>\n<p>It recounts that D.C. bar authorities charged Clark with ethical violations in 2022, reportedly influenced by a politically driven ethics complaint, and after years of litigation a tribunal recommended disbarment. The article criticizes the tribunal\u2019s rationale as effectively treating disagreement with superiors\u2019 views as dishonesty, and says Clark is appealing because the outcome could chill lawyers from giving advice that conflicts with their leadership.<\/p>\n<p>The DOJ lawsuit, according to the piece, seeks broader relief than just overturning Clark\u2019s discipline, alleging a \u201cpattern and practice\u201d of bad-faith and harassing prosecutions targeting political viewpoints. The article also points to social media posts by a key disciplinary official as evidence of bias, and notes that DOJ actions have extended into related disciplinary matters involving other officials-framing them as retaliatory or interference with federal duties.<\/p>\n<p>the article argues that if such disciplinary actions against federal lawyers continue, they could disrupt the federal system by undermining constitutional structures and presidential authority, and it frames the DOJ case as another step toward stopping political targeting of attorneys.  <\/p>\n<p class=\"readmore\">\n    <button onclick=\"showReadMore()\" id=\"readmorebtn\">Read more&#8230;<\/button>\n<\/p>\n<hr id=\"line\">\n<span id=\"more\"><\/p>\n<div>\n<p>The Department of Justice last week announced the creation of a $1.776 billion \u201cAnti-Weaponization Fund\u201d to repay victims of <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/courage-is-a-christians-only-path-forward-from-the-legal-hell-the-winsome-gospel-wrought\/\" title=\"Courage Is A Christian\u2019s Only Path Forward From The Legal Hell The \u2018Winsome\u2019 Gospel Wrought\">left-wing lawfare<\/a>. While it remains to be seen whether this funding could go to MAGA lawyers who are victims of frivolous left-wing ethics complaints brought before Democrat-dominated bar disciplinary authorities, other remedies are already underway.<\/p>\n<p>With a new landmark <a href=\"https:\/\/www.justice.gov\/opa\/media\/1440681\/dl\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">lawsuit<\/a>, the Trump Justice Department is finally fighting this \u201cbarfare\u201d \u2014leftist efforts to render the right defenseless by crushing or chilling conservative attorneys via stress-inducing probes, costly trials, and crippling penalties that include disbarment. On May 13, the DOJ filed a complaint against the bar disciplinary authorities of Washington, D.C., in defense of former Trump I DOJ official Jeffrey Clark, the Constitution, and the rule of law itself. <\/p>\n<p>Those authorities investigated, tried, and convicted the accomplished litigator for a novel \u201cthoughtcrime\u201d: preparing a document proposing a legal course of action based on a reading of evidence that his DOJ superiors disagreed with.<\/p>\n<p>As detailed in previous reporting at <a href=\"https:\/\/www.realclearinvestigations.com\/articles\/2025\/09\/30\/from_lawfare_to_barfare_another_way_to_target_trump_allies_1137892.html\">RealClearInvestigations<\/a>, Clark, then-serving as Acting Assistant Attorney General for the DOJ\u2019s Civil Division, believed that <a href=\"https:\/\/amzn.to\/3YuVZYV\" >potentially election-altering irregularities occurred<\/a> during the 2020 presidential election, including in Georgia. So after the contest he drafted a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.documentcloud.org\/documents\/21087991-jeffrey-clark-draft-letter\/\">letter<\/a> on the department\u2019s behalf to Peach State leaders to address such matters. He designated the letter as \u201cPre-Decisional &#038; Deliberative\/Attorney-Client or Legal Work Product\u201d and \u201cFOR INTERNAL \u2026 USE ONLY,\u201d and dubbed it a \u201cProof of Concept\u201d document. The letter indicated that the DOJ had identified potential election-swinging issues and called on the state to convene a special legislative session to review and remedy such matters.<\/p>\n<p>Clark presented the letter to his bosses, including Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, for review. They disagreed with its claims regarding 2020 election integrity issues and Clark\u2019s plan to address them. Ultimately, the document would go unsent, only to leak after President Trump had left office during Democrats\u2019 Jan. 6-related political and legal jihad.<\/p>\n<p>After the inauguration of Joe Biden, no fewer than four authorities scrutinized the white-shoe lawyer for daring to question the legitimacy of the 2020 election and merely fighting for the DOJ to do something about it. The first three \u2014 the Jan. 6 Committee, Special Counsel Jack Smith, and the Fulton County district attorney \u2014 would all strike out in their attempts to destroy him.<\/p>\n<p>Barfare would serve as what Clark recently <a href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/JeffClarkUS\/status\/2057093676497526926?s=20\">termed<\/a> Democrats\u2019 \u201cweaponization tactic of last resort.\u201d In July 2022, D.C. bar disciplinary authorities charged Clark with ethical violations, including \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.documentcloud.org\/documents\/22111902-jeffrey-clark-specification-of-charges-from-dc-bar\/?q=senate&#038;mode=document#document\/p4\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">conduct involving dishonesty<\/a>,\u201d over his drafting and defending of the document. The then-Democrat-led Senate Judiciary Committee allegedly spurred the case by lodging an ethics complaint with the D.C. regime.<\/p>\n<p>After three years of arduous and costly litigation, the disciplinary tribunal <a href=\"https:\/\/s3.documentcloud.org\/documents\/26105766\/2025-07-31-report-and-recommendation-of-the-board-on-professional-responsibility-2.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">found<\/a> that Clark had attempted \u201cto <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/jeff-clark-barfare-exposes-leftist-attempt-to-target-trump-allies\/\" title=\"Jeff ... &#039;Barfare&#039; Exposes Leftist Attempt To Target Trump Allies\">make intentionally false statements<\/a> about the results of the Justice Department\u2019s investigation\u201d into the 2020 election. What was the tribunal\u2019s reasoning? That Clark\u2019s views did not comport with those of his superiors, his superiors by default represented those of the department, and therefore, by ascribing his conflicting views to the department in his draft, unsent, \u201cpre-decisional\u201d letter, he was somehow being dishonest.<\/p>\n<p>Despite admitting that there were \u201cno <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/dc-bar-that-restored-russiagate-felon-tries-to-disbar-jeff-clark\/\" title=\"DC Bar That Restored Russiagate Felon Tries To Disbar Jeff ...\">factually comparable prior disciplinary cases<\/a>,\u201d the tribunal recommended that Clark be disbarred.<\/p>\n<p>Clark is appealing the absurd and outrageous case \u2014 one that would render it potentially career-ending to provide legal advice that might conflict with that of one\u2019s superiors. The case would also seem to make it fair game for disciplinary authorities to review and potentially render punishment over internal draft documents containing hypothetical legal proposals.<\/p>\n<p>DOJ\u2019s suit aims to halt his persecution via injunction. But its indictment of Clark\u2019s persecutors runs deeper, and the ruling it seeks is far broader. The department asserts that the D.C. tribunal has engaged in a \u201cpattern and practice of bad-faith and harassing prosecutions \u2026 based on viewpoint and political affiliation,\u201d reflecting the \u201cweaponization\u201d of the bar disciplinary process.<\/p>\n<p>The suit details that Assistant Disciplinary Counsel Jack Metzler, a defendant and key member of the Clark prosecution, \u201cposted dozens\u201d of <a href=\"https:\/\/www.dailysignal.com\/2026\/05\/13\/dc-bar-bias\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">anti-conservative messages<\/a> during and after the case on social media, indicating the office\u2019s bias and motivation for targeting conservative lawyers.<\/p>\n<p>Following the filing of the Justice Department\u2019s suit in Clark\u2019s case, Metzler <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/news\/justice\/4573439\/dc-bar-lawyer-withdraws-from-ed-martin-case\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">removed<\/a> himself from a related case brought by his office, which is led by another named defendant, Disciplinary Counsel Hamilton P. Fox III. The office is likewise prosecuting a current DOJ official, U.S. Pardon Attorney Ed Martin, for his allegedly unethical correspondence with Georgetown University Law Center. <\/p>\n<p>As <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2026\/03\/19\/ed-martin-challenged-the-d-c-bars-political-vendetta-then-they-charged-him\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">detailed<\/a> previously, while serving as interim U.S. attorney for D.C., Martin confronted the school over its alleged promotion of DEI, indicating its responses could affect its nonprofit status and federal funding. Fox\u2019s office is pursuing Martin based on <em>its opinion<\/em> that he threatened the school\u2019s constitutional rights. The kicker is that Fox\u2019s office brought the Martin case <em>after<\/em> Martin had questioned Fox about his office\u2019s alleged weaponization against Clark. DOJ calls the case \u201cretaliatory.\u201d The department recently intervened on Martin\u2019s behalf, filing a <a href=\"https:\/\/storage.courtlistener.com\/recap\/gov.uscourts.dcd.291224\/gov.uscourts.dcd.291224.6.0.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">statement of interest<\/a> in his case and calling for its removal to federal court.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, the Justice Department notes the D.C. bar disciplinary tribunal\u2019s lenient treatment of leftists in contrast to its treatment of conservatives: When FBI Attorney Kevin Clinesmith was caught doctoring an email to convince the FISA Court to let the feds spy on Trump adviser Carter Page, the D.C. bar gave him a \u201cslap on the wrist\u201d with a retroactive one-year license suspension.<\/p>\n<p>The suit closes with a trio of legal arguments that transcend Clark\u2019s case or claims of a bar disciplinary authority run amok: first, that the Constitution\u2019s Supremacy Clause prohibits state and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/ed-martin-challenged-the-d-c-bars-political-vendetta-then-they-charged-him\/\" title=\"Ed ... Challenged The D.C. Bar&#039;s Political Vendetta. Then They Charged Him\">local bar disciplinary authorities<\/a> from regulating the work of federal officials like Clark via bar disciplinary proceedings; second, that such authorities engage in unlawful discrimination by subjecting federal lawyers to disciplinary cases never before brought against non-federal lawyers; third, that by targeting federal attorneys over their work, such authorities are unlawfully interfering with presidential power.<\/p>\n<p>Barfare like that of the D.C. bar disciplinary authority would paralyze the federal government and our federalist system if successful. That is precisely what the left threatens with Democrat-aligned groups lodging additional ethics complaints against a range of targets from Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche down to career department attorneys.<\/p>\n<p>The DOJ\u2019s lawsuit does not directly address lawfare activists\u2019 targeting of non-government lawyers with disbarment and destruction for taking up verboten causes, such as constitutional scholar <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2026\/04\/23\/if-scotus-values-free-speech-it-will-stop-californias-persecution-of-john-eastman\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">John Eastman\u2019s work<\/a> contesting the 2020 presidential election. Still, it may prove far more effective than the Justice Department\u2019s <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2026\/03\/12\/trump-doj-is-finally-taking-on-the-corrupt-dc-bar-association\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">proposed rule<\/a> giving the agency the right to review (but not to quash) efforts to cripple conservative federal lawyers via the likes of the D.C. bar disciplinary authorities.<\/p>\n<p>The lawsuit represents a vital step toward ending an un-American war on disfavored attorneys and defenders of disfavored causes \u2014 a war that would do irrevocable damage to our justice system and republic.<\/p>\n<hr>\n<p>      Ben Weingarten is editor at large for RealClearInvestigations. He is a senior contributor to The Federalist, columnist at Newsweek, and a contributor to the New York Post and Epoch Times, among other publications. Subscribe to his newsletter at weingarten.substack.com, and follow him on Twitter: @bhweingarten.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>DOJ creates a $1.776B Anti-Weaponization Fund, while a new suit targets D.C. bar \u201cbarfare\u201d against conservative attorneys<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":698,"featured_media":2606830,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Copy-of-Untitled-2026-05-22T105651.109.png","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[73160,80268,7076,69807],"class_list":["post-2606829","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","tag-civil-rights-2","tag-democratic-politics-2","tag-doj","tag-legal-news-2"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Copy-of-Untitled-2026-05-22T105651.109.png","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2606829","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/698"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2606829"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2606829\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2606833,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2606829\/revisions\/2606833"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2606830"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2606829"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2606829"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2606829"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}