March 10 (UPI) — U.S. Pardon Attorney Ed Martin is facing a complaint that could lead to disciplinary action for a letter he wrote to to Georgetown University Law School, threatening action if it didn’t end diversity policies.
A filing submitted to the D.C. Court of Appeals Board on Professional Responsibility also alleges that Martin tried to evade action from the Office of Disciplinary Counsel by ignoring its letters and asking a judge to intervene.
Martin was a nominee for U.S. attorney, but his nomination didn’t receive enough Senate votes for approval, largely because he supported Jan. 6 rioters. He was then given the position of pardons attorney in the Department of Justice.
Hamilton P. Fox III, disciplinary counsel for the District of Columbia Bar, signed the filing against Martin. If The Bar ultimately finds Martin violated ethics rules, he could be disbarred.
In February 2025, Martin sent a letter to Georgetown Law, saying that he would not hire any interns or graduates from the school because of its “DEI” policies and teaching, the complaint said. He later escalated the threat, saying that if the school didn’t respond, it would “bear directly” on its status as a nonprofit.
Fox alleged that Martin “knew or should have known that, as a government official, his conduct violated the First and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.”
“Acting in his official capacity and speaking on behalf of the government, he used coercion to punish or suppress a disfavored viewpoint, the teaching and promotion of ‘DEI,'” Fox said, adding that Martin never defined DEI in his letter to the university.
Martin is accused of breaking multiple ethics rules, including: violating his oath of office after swearing to support the Constitution, having unauthorized ex parte communications with a judge and “engaging in conduct that seriously interferes with the administration of justice.”
Justice Department spokesperson Emily Covington said in a statement that trying to “target and punish those serving President Trump while refusing to investigate or act against actual ethical violations that were committed by Biden and Obama administration attorneys is a clear indication of this partisan organization’s agenda.” She didn’t elaborate on her accusations about previous administrations.
In March 2025, the D.C. Bar wrote to Martin to ask about behavior complaints and asked him to respond in writing. He instead wrote a letter to the judges of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
“In that letter, he stated that he would not be responding to Disciplinary Counsel’s inquiry, complained about Disciplinary Counsel’s ‘uneven behavior,’ and requested a ‘face-to-face meeting with all of you to discuss this matter and find a way forward.’ He copied the White House Counsel ‘for informational purposes because of the importance of getting this issue addressed,'” Fox said.
Chief Judge Anna Blackburne-Rigsby declined the meeting, saying it would be improper. Then Martin asked Blackburne-Rigsby to suspend Fox and investigate him.
Fox noted in his filing that doing so also violates The Bar’s Rules of Professional Conduct because attorneys can’t communicate with a judge about their own disciplinary cases.
The Justice Department itself has made allegations against Martin, The Hill reported. In one case, the department used a grand jury in Maryland to determine if Martin improperly deputized people outside the DOJ to help with investigations into Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and New York Attorney General Letitia James. Both are Trump’s perceived enemies.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.