Jeffrey Clark Witness Claims Sanctions Threaten Agency Dialogue

Sanctioning Jeffrey Clark over his claims of 2020 election fraud would set a dangerous precedent, a Yale Law School adjunct professor said Thursday.

Possible disbarment of the former US assistant attorney general could have a “devastating effect on dialogue that goes on within government agencies,” E. Donald Elliott told a DC Bar panel.

The bar hearing committee took witness testimony for a third day in a proceeding to determine if Clark should be sanctioned for his role at Justice in challenging the 2020 election results. A lost law license could hamper Clark’s ability to win a high post in a second Trump administration.

Clark called people to testify after DC Disciplinary Counsel Hamilton “Phil” Fox III on Wednesday finished questioning witnesses that included Jeffrey Rosen, the former acting attorney general.

Government staffers often adopt consensus views, so it’s important for appointees such as Clark to challenge them, Elliott said. The goal is “free and open debate within the executive branch,” he said.

“It would be extremely unfortunate if the standards of dishonesty applied to debates among lawyers within government,” said Elliott, who was general counsel for the US Environmental Protection Agency from 1989 to 1991.

Clark in a Dec. 28, 2020 letter claimed to have identified “significant concerns” that may have affected the outcome of the 2020 presidential election in several states. Fox has alleged that Clark violated rules of professional conduct in part by attempting to send that letter.

Clark is set to call additional witnesses that include Republican Reps. Matt Gaetz of Florida and Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and former US attorney general Edwin Meese. The hearing could last several more days.