A political battle is raging in the halls of justice, not in the courtroom, but within the state bar associations. A coalition of left-wing groups and law professors is aggressively filing ethics complaints against high-ranking government lawyers, including US Attorney General Pam Bondi, alleging professional misconduct for “zealously” advocating for the interests of the United States and the president.
The controversy highlights a growing trend of “lawfare” where ethics complaints are being used as a political weapon, primarily targeting conservative attorneys serving in or defending the administration.
The Bondi Complaint: ‘Override Ethical Obligations’
According to the complaint, shortly after taking office, Bondi reportedly instructed Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys to “zealously” advocate for the United States and the president. This directive prompted a complaint filed by a coalition of left-wing groups and law professors, urging the Florida bar to investigate her for misconduct.
The complaint accuses Bondi of a “concerted effort to override ethical obligations,” citing internal incidents such as the firing of a lawyer and dismissing a high-profile prosecution.
READ: Florida Rep. Byron Donalds Slams Obamacare Costs: “It’s Never Been Affordable”
The Florida bar, however, had previously declined two prior complaints against Bondi, stating it “does not investigate or prosecute sitting officers appointed under the U.S. Constitution while they are in office.” This policy, the complainants argue, leaves federal officers immune from bar authority.
A Broader Strategy of ‘Lawfare’
The case against Bondi is just one of at least a dozen ethics complaints leveled against lawyers in high positions—including Deputy United States Attorney General Todd Blanche and DOJ attorneys defending the administration in litigation.
The Legal Accountability Center (LAC), led by Michael Teter, is at the forefront of this effort.
Teter also led The 65 Project, which filed complaints against numerous attorneys associated with President Donald Trump after the 2020 election, including John Eastman and Cleta Mitchell. Eastman faces a recommendation to lose his license in California, while former DOJ official Jeff Clark faces an ongoing threat to his law license following the D.C. Bar’s finding that he attempted to give “dishonest” legal advice related to the 2020 election.
READ: ICE Targets Illegal Immigrant Teens Arrested In Reckless Virginia I-295 Shooting Spree
Backlash and Defense
Conservative lawyers are pushing back. America First Legal (AFL) filed a bar complaint against Michael Teter for allegedly abusing the process “to punish lawyers associated” with Trump.
AFL Executive Director Gene Hamilton condemned the tactic, stating that “Seeking the personal destruction and financial ruin of another lawyer—simply because of the client he represented or the cause he took up—runs counter to…the way we conduct ourselves in a free society.”
Former U.S. Attorneys General William Barr, Jeff Sessions, and Michael Mukasey also weighed in, filing a brief supporting Jeff Clark.
They argue that disciplining federal attorneys for internal debates over policy and law enforcement functions would interfere with the Executive Branch’s core constitutional ability to carry out its duties. They warned that such “acts of political retribution” would “severely discourage lawyers from serving in the federal government.”
Meanwhile, a DOJ spokesperson defended the department’s attorneys, saying they “are going into court and vigorously defending the Executive Branch with integrity” and that “Any assertion that our attorneys have engaged in professional misconduct is baseless and unfounded.”
Calls for a Jurisdictional Shift
With standards varying by jurisdiction and Congress limited by state-level law practice regulation, Fragoso suggests that the solution may lie in a strategic shift: “The solution might be for conservative lawyers to get admitted in a state like Texas or Florida and for their supreme courts to make it clear that lawfare bar discipline from liberal jurisdictions won’t bear on fitness to practice.”
The increasing use of ethics complaints as a political tool signals a widening, and potentially disruptive, politicization of the legal profession’s regulatory bodies.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox.
