The case places a sitting Justice Department official under formal ethics scrutiny for using the power of a federal prosecutor’s office to pressure a private university’s curriculum decisions — a move Georgetown’s dean said constituted a clear First Amendment violation and an attack on the institution’s academic mission.
Washington’s attorney ethics office has filed professional misconduct charges against Ed Martin, the Justice Department’s pardon attorney, for a letter he sent last year to Georgetown Law School’s dean threatening to bar the school’s students from federal prosecutor jobs unless the university eliminated its diversity, equity and inclusion programs.
The Office of Disciplinary Counsel filed the charges on Friday, accusing Martin of violating his oath of office and the Constitution’s protections for free speech and due process. Disciplinary Counsel Hamilton Fox is asking a panel of D.C. Court of Appeals officials to determine whether discipline is warranted. Martin has 20 days to formally respond in writing; he and an attorney representing him did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The Letter
Martin was serving as the interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia when he sent the letter to Georgetown Law Dean William Treanor in February of last year. Martin said a whistleblower had informed him that Georgetown Law School “continues to promote and teach DEI.”
“This is unacceptable,” Martin wrote, warning Treanor that his office would not consider any Georgetown law students for jobs, summer internships or fellowships until his “letter of inquiry” was resolved. The letter came shortly after President Donald Trump signed an executive order calling for the elimination of DEI programs in the federal government.
Treanor rejected the threat in his response, asserting that the Constitution bars the government from dictating university curriculum.
“Given the First Amendment’s protection of a university’s freedom to determine its own curriculum and how to deliver it, the constitutional violation behind this threat is clear, as is the attack on the University’s mission as a Jesuit and Catholic institution,” Treanor wrote.
After Martin learned of the accusations against him last year, he sent a separate letter to D.C. Court of Appeals judges complaining about Fox’s “uneven behavior” and requesting a “face-to-face meeting with all of you to discuss this matter and find a way forward,” according to Fox’s filing.
Justice Department Response
The Justice Department defended Martin. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said the complaint was the product of “a blatantly Democrat-run political organization,” and a department statement said the charges fit a “partisan organization’s agenda” to punish Trump administration officials while ignoring ethical lapses by attorneys who served under Democratic administrations.
“Let us not forget that DC-barred members of Biden’s special counsel were found to have acted against President Trump without legal authority and in clear violation of the Constitution, yet the bar did nothing,” the department’s statement said.
Martin’s Trajectory
Martin, a conservative activist with no prosecutorial experience before his appointment, was a leading figure in Trump’s “Stop the Steal” movement following the 2020 presidential election. Trump nominated him last January to lead the U.S. Attorney’s office for the District of Columbia, the nation’s largest such office. Trump later withdrew the nomination after a key Republican senator said he could not support Martin because of his outspoken advocacy for Trump supporters who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
In May, Trump picked Fox News host Jeanine Pirro to replace Martin as U.S. Attorney. Martin remains at the Justice Department as pardon attorney but was recently removed as head of its “Weaponization Working Group,” which was tasked with scrutinizing the federal prosecutions of Trump.