Ed Martin Faces D.C. Attorney Discipline Proceedings
Ed Martin, a former Trump administration official and current Justice Department pardon attorney, is facing attorney discipline proceedings in Washington, D.C. The actions stem from a letter he sent to Georgetown Law in February 2023 regarding its diversity, inclusion, and equity (DEI) initiatives, as well as his conduct during the subsequent investigation. Hamilton Fox III, the Disciplinary Counsel for D.C., has formally accused Martin of violating ethical codes.
Ethics Charges Related to Georgetown Law Letter
In February 2023, while serving as interim U.S. attorney for D.C., Ed Martin sent a letter to Georgetown University Law Center officials. In this letter, Martin stated that his office would not hire students from the school due to its DEI initiatives. Source 2 specifies that Martin informed Georgetown officials of a whistleblower allegation concerning the teaching of DEI principles and subsequently instructed his office staff not to employ any Georgetown Law students as fellows, interns, or employees.
The Disciplinary Counsel alleges that Martin, acting in his official capacity as a government official, used coercion to suppress a disfavored viewpoint—specifically, the teaching and promotion of DEI.
The complaint further states that Martin demanded Georgetown Law relinquish its free speech and religious rights to maintain employment opportunities for its students. Fox asserts that Martin knew or should have known his conduct violated the First and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.
William Treanor, then-dean of Georgetown Law, responded to Martin's letter, describing it as "an attack on the University's mission as a Jesuit and Catholic institution."
Conduct During Investigation
Martin is also facing charges related to his conduct during the ethics investigation. When the Office of Disciplinary Counsel initiated an inquiry and requested a formal response to an initial complaint, Martin reportedly refused to engage. Instead, he sent an ex parte letter to the chief judge and senior judges of the D.C. Court of Appeals, stating he would not respond and expressing complaints about the Disciplinary Counsel's "uneven behavior."
Despite being informed by the chief judge that ex parte communication was improper, Martin reportedly continued to contact the judge to express concerns about the investigation. These communications included requests to suspend the Disciplinary Counsel and dismiss the case against him. The Disciplinary Counsel alleges these actions constitute improperly communicating ex parte with a judge and seriously interfering with the administration of justice.
Responses and Background
The Justice Department, represented by an attorney for Martin, issued a statement criticizing the Disciplinary Counsel's complaint.
The statement characterized the action as an attempt to target and punish those who served President Trump, suggesting it was a clear sign of a "partisan organization's agenda."
The Justice Department accused the D.C. Bar of targeting individuals serving a specific administration while not investigating other alleged ethical violations.
Martin was removed from his role as interim U.S. attorney for D.C. after sending the letter but remained with the Justice Department in other capacities, including as pardon attorney. He was also chief of an internal working group and has since been stripped of his title over the "Weaponization Working Group," though he remains on staff as pardon attorney.
His previous tenure as interim U.S. attorney was associated with his advocacy for individuals involved in the January 6, 2021, Capitol incident. He also previously served as a special assistant U.S. attorney investigating mortgage fraud allegations, including a case against New York Attorney General Letitia James, which was later dismissed. James' attorney has accused Martin of misconduct in that case.
The disciplinary complaint marks a bar discipline proceeding against a high-profile official associated with President Donald Trump. The Attorney General's office recently indicated a more powerful role in reviewing attorney discipline complaints against Justice Department attorneys.
Next Steps
This formal complaint initiates professional conduct proceedings for Martin, requiring his response. Should the discipline boards and the court determine that he violated ethical codes, he could face sanctions, which may include the potential loss of his law license.