Conservative organizations and Republican senators will gather on Wednesday in Washington to organize a response to what they describe as “barfare,” the use of attorney disciplinary proceedings to punish lawyers for representing President Donald Trump and his allies.
The all-day summit comes as Trump allies build a legal defense operation ahead of possible Democratic congressional majorities and as the Justice Department challenges D.C. disciplinary authorities in federal court.
Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward will join Sens. Eric Schmitt (R-MO) and Mike Lee (R-UT) for the event titled “BARFARE: Stopping Bar Discipline as Political Warfare.” The Conservative Partnership Institute, Claremont Institute, Oversight Project, and American Ascent are hosting the Wednesday conference, which will run from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. at Bellator Hall on Capitol Hill.
“For years, the Left has used and abused bar discipline actions as a method to scare lawyers away from certain clients and deprive their political enemies of the legal representation to which they are entitled,” Lee told the Washington Examiner ahead of the event. “This is deeply corrupt, cutting to the heart of our justice system and the practice of law, and it must end.”
Woodward, who previously represented White House trade adviser Peter Navarro in his contempt-of-Congress case before taking his current role, is one of the key figures in the DOJ helping lead its challenge to D.C. bar disciplinary authorities.
He filed the department’s May 13 lawsuit seeking to nullify disciplinary proceedings against former DOJ official and Trump ally Jeffrey Clark. The department argues that local disciplinary authorities cannot punish federal lawyers for internal executive branch deliberations, including for Clark’s advocacy for a draft letter concerning the 2020 election that DOJ leadership declined to send.
Another scheduled speaker, Ed Martin, is the outgoing U.S. pardon attorney and former interim U.S. attorney for D.C. The DOJ separately backed Martin’s effort to have his disciplinary case heard in federal court. Its complaint cites proceedings over his letter to Georgetown University Law Center regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion policies.
The summit will also spotlight John Eastman, who filed a Supreme Court petition Sept. 11 challenging his California disbarment over his work contesting the 2020 election.
Eastman argues that campaigns against Trump attorneys are intended to discourage other lawyers from taking similar cases.
“My case is the poster child for the effort — if they can disbar me, a prominent constitutional attorney, former Supreme Court clerk, and former law school dean, they can disbar anybody,” Eastman told the Washington Examiner. “The chilling effect is already serving its purpose.”
He urged the Supreme Court to take his case and reject treating lawyers’ speech and petitioning as less protected because they occur in a professional setting. A clear First Amendment ruling, he argued, would also make it harder for disciplinary officials to invoke qualified immunity in future cases.
California disciplinary authorities dispute his characterization. The State Bar said his disbarment followed findings that he advanced false election claims to mislead courts, officials, and the public.
For Conservative Partnership Institute attorney Cleta Mitchell, the response must go beyond recruiting defense lawyers.
“The real question is not how do we build a network of lawyers to defend attorneys who represent conservative clients. That’s really not the right question,” Mitchell said. “The abuse of the bar disciplinary process by leftist activists and their billionaire donors is wholly unacceptable. It is an assault on our system of justice.”
Mitchell called for courts and state bar associations to stop politically motivated complaints and urged the Supreme Court to vacate Eastman’s disbarment.
Claremont President Ryan Williams framed the dispute as a failure of professional neutrality, accusing the American Bar Association of becoming a partisan institution. The ABA is distinct from the state and D.C. authorities responsible for attorney discipline.
“The ABA’s progressivism and hostility to the American Right is now so ingrained in the association that reform seems unlikely absent the ability of the targets of lawfare to seek compensation for the violation of their constitutional rights,” Williams said. “Alternatively, as our libertarian friends are arguing, perhaps the existing bar licensing infrastructure should simply be dismantled.”
The agenda includes alleged funding and coordination behind complaints, disciplinary cases, pardons, and potential judicial remedies.
It also builds on the Oversight Project’s recruitment push. Clark announced Sept. 16 that he would lead a new law firm under its banner to challenge alleged abuses involving legislative investigations, bar proceedings, and prosecutions. The effort would extend representation to staffers who could face legal bills if Democrats regain subpoena power after November’s elections.
TRUMP ALLIES BUILDING ‘LAWFARE’ DEFENSE APPARATUS BEFORE POSSIBLE DEMOCRATIC TAKEOVER
Schmitt cast the summit as part of a continuing fight over the use of government power against political opponents.
“This kind of lawfare flies in the face of our rights as Americans. We must continue fighting left-wing lawfare and its ramifications,” Schmitt told the Washington Examiner. “What started under [former President Barack Obama] and continued under [former President Joe Biden] may be dormant, but it definitely is not dead.”
Continue reading...
[ H/T Washington Examiner ]
