DOJ Shake-Up: Ex-Official FACES Disbarment

Is the DC Bar really taking a stand for justice, or are they just playing political games with the disbarment of Jeffrey Clark?

Story Snapshot

• The DC Board has recommended the disbarment of Jeffrey Clark, a former DOJ official.
• Clark is accused of attempting to overturn the 2020 election results with false claims.
• This decision follows the controversial reinstatement of Kevin Clinesmith, convicted in the Russiagate scandal.
• The recommendation now awaits final action from the DC Court of Appeals.

Clark’s Alleged Misconduct

The District of Columbia Board on Professional Responsibility has taken a bold step by recommending the disbarment of Jeffrey Clark, a former senior Justice Department official. This action stems from Clark’s alleged attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election results. Clark reportedly drafted a letter to Georgia officials, urging them to reconsider the certified election results based on unfounded claims of election fraud. This move has sparked debate about the integrity and accountability of government lawyers.

On January 3, 2021, Clark informed DOJ leadership of his plans to accept President Trump’s offer to become Acting Attorney General and send the letter himself. This proposition faced strong resistance from acting DOJ leaders Jeffrey Rosen and Richard Donoghue, who threatened resignation. Ultimately, President Trump backed down, but the damage had been done. Clark’s actions have since been under scrutiny, leading to the DC Board’s recommendation for disbarment.

Corrupt DC Bar Moves To Disbar Jeff Clark After Restoring License Of Russiagate Felon Kevin Clinesmith https://t.co/j8IH76MQfQ

— The Federalist (@FDRLST) August 1, 2025

DC Bar’s Controversial Actions

This recommendation raises eyebrows, particularly in light of the board’s recent decision to restore the license of Kevin Clinesmith. Clinesmith, a former FBI lawyer, was convicted for falsifying documents in the Russiagate investigation. This stark contrast in handling two high-profile cases has led many to question the motivations of the DC Bar. Are they genuinely upholding legal ethics, or is there a deeper, politically charged agenda at play?

Clark’s disciplinary proceedings and indictment in Georgia’s election interference case have been ongoing from 2023 to 2025. The recommendation for disbarment, issued on July 31, 2025, cites clear and convincing evidence of dishonest conduct. This decision aims to uphold legal ethics and deter similar conduct in the future. However, the political undercurrents cannot be ignored.

The Political and Professional Implications

Clark’s disbarment recommendation now moves to the DC Court of Appeals for final action. Should the court uphold the recommendation, Clark’s legal career could be at risk. This case sets a precedent for disciplinary action against attorneys engaged in efforts to undermine democratic processes. The implications are far-reaching, impacting not only Clark but also the broader legal profession and public trust in democratic institutions.

The political ramifications are equally significant. The case intensifies the debate over accountability for post-2020 election conduct. It also underscores the tension between political loyalty and professional ethics. While some conservative commentators argue that the process was politically motivated, the board’s findings are backed by extensive evidence and testimony from DOJ officials.

Legal and Ethical Perspectives

Legal analysts emphasize the importance of upholding ethical standards, especially for government lawyers. Glenn Kirschner, a former federal prosecutor, described the recommendation as a necessary message to the legal profession and public. This case highlights the primacy of truthfulness and integrity in legal advocacy, reinforcing the need for accountability in politically sensitive roles.

As the legal community and the public await the final decision from the DC Court of Appeals, the broader impacts of this case continue to unfold. The potential for reputational consequences for law firms and institutions associated with involved parties looms large. For now, the spotlight remains on the DC Bar and its role in shaping the future of legal ethics and accountability.