04/06/2026
I just submitted this comment. Feel free to cut-and-paste whatever you want to use!
As a therapist licensed by my own state agency and under its rules for moral, ethical, and legal standards and practices, I DO NOT support the DOJ and Federal overreach in blocking investigations and license seizure by a weaponized and criminal Federal department (the DOJ) allowing criminal actions to supersede state jurisdiction in a bid to protect DOJ professionals under this proposal.
The argument against the Department of Justice (DOJ) overriding state licensing agencies centers on the principle of Federalism and the Tenth Amendment, which reserves to the states powers not delegated to the federal government. For over a century, the regulation of the legal profession has been a traditional state function, handled by state supreme courts and bar associations to ensure local accountability and ethical integrity.
1. Violation of the Tenth Amendment and "Anti-Commandeering"
The core constitutional argument is that the federal government cannot "commandeer" state regulatory apparatuses or displace their sovereign authority to license and discipline professionals.
Sovereign Police Power: Licensing is an exercise of a state's "police power" to protect its citizens from incompetent or unethical practitioners.
Federal Overreach: When the DOJ attempts to "review" or "stay" state disciplinary proceedings, it effectively seizes a power it does not possess, interfering with the independent judicial branch of that state.
2. Defiance of the "McDade Amendment" (28 U.S.C. § 530B)
In 1998, Congress explicitly passed the McDade-Murtha Amendment, which mandates that DOJ attorneys are subject to the same state ethical rules as all other lawyers in the jurisdictions where they practice.
Legislative Intent: This law was designed specifically to prevent the DOJ from creating its own internal "ethics bubble."
Equality Under the Law: Allowing the DOJ to override state bar investigations would create a two-tiered system where federal lawyers are "above the law," exempted from the standards applied to every other licensed attorney in that state.
3. Destruction of Checks and Balances
State bar associations serve as a critical, independent check on executive power. If the DOJ becomes the "judge and jury" of its own attorneys' misconduct, there is no external accountability for government lawyers who may mislead courts or violate civil rights.
Conflict of Interest: An agency cannot impartially investigate its own employees, especially when those employees may have been acting on the agency's direct orders.
Erosion of Public Trust: Shielding lawyers from the standard licensing process undermines the public's confidence that all officers of the court—whether federal or private—are held to the same ethical bar.
4. Usurpation of Judicial Authority
Professional discipline in most states is a function of the State Supreme Court. A federal agency (the DOJ) attempting to override these proceedings is not just a conflict with a "bar association," but a direct assault on the independence of the state judiciary.
Precedent: Critics argue this move is "inconsistent with all precedents" because the highest court of each state has exclusive jurisdiction over the practice of law within its borders.
SUBMIT YOUR STATEMENT IN PUBLIC COMMENT NOW!!
The Department of Justice ("Department") proposes to establish a process for reviewing bar complaints and allegations against its attorneys. Under the proposed rule, before a current or former Department lawyer may participate in any investigative steps initiated by the bar disciplinary authority...
