Former Department of Justice lawyer Jeffrey Clark is now confronting significant legal repercussions, as a Washington, DC, legal board has initiated proceedings to disbar him following his controversial actions related to the 2020 presidential election. These actions, described by the board as pressuring states to investigate and potentially reverse election outcomes, have ignited a fierce debate over legal ethics and the responsibilities of government attorneys during periods of political transition.
The DC legal board, after extensive review, rendered a decision on Thursday recommending Clark’s suspension from practicing law for 30 days. More critically, the ruling calls for his complete disbarment unless the DC Court of Appeals intervenes and overturns the decision, setting a stringent precedent for future conduct within the legal profession.
In their detailed ruling, the board asserted that Clark “persistently and energetically sought” to manipulate the outcome of a national election, deeming such behavior intolerable for a member of the bar. This stern pronouncement underscores the gravity of his alleged attempts to undermine the integrity of the 2020 election results and the importance of upholding democratic processes.
Defending his actions, Clark stated, “I know I did the right thing in 2020 and 2021 during the first President Trump Administration and wouldn’t be able to look at myself in the mirror if I had not proceeded to internally raise the election questions I did.” His perspective highlights a perceived duty to address what he viewed as legitimate concerns regarding the election, contrasting sharply with the board’s findings.
Congressional Democrats in 2021 had previously accused Clark, then an assistant attorney general in the DOJ’s Civil Division, of actively attempting to involve the Department of Justice in efforts to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. These accusations centered on his alleged urgings for special state legislative sessions to “evaluate” unsubstantiated claims of voter fraud, further fueling the controversy surrounding the 2020 election integrity.
The backdrop to Clark’s actions includes former President Donald Trump’s consideration of appointing him as acting attorney general in the period between his electoral defeat to Joe Biden and the official certification of the 2020 count by Congress on January 6, 2021. This potential appointment underscores the critical role Clark was poised to play in the post-election legal challenges of the Trump administration.
Clark is not alone among former Trump administration legal figures facing professional disciplinary action. Other attorneys, such as John Eastman, who authored a memo claiming then-Vice President Mike Pence possessed the authority to reject vote counts from swing states, and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, have also confronted disbarment proceedings related to their involvement in challenging the 2020 election challenges.
In response to the board’s decision, James Burnham, a lawyer who recently transitioned to lead an AI policy group, vehemently criticized the ruling. Burnham labeled it “an outrageous weaponization of the bar ethics process,” cautioning that such a precedent “could be turned against any lawyer serving in government at any time,” and called for strong pushback against the decision, advocating for the protection of legal ethics in public service.
While serving as Trump’s acting head of the Office of Management and Budget’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, the full ramifications of this disbarment recommendation on Clark’s current ability to undertake this significant federal role remain uncertain, adding another layer of complexity to his ongoing legal and professional challenges stemming from his involvement in the 2020 election integrity discussions.
