News / The Fair And Just Journal

At a time when public confidence in institutions is steadily declining, proposals that weaken accountability risk doing further damage to the justice system and public safety. A recently proposed federal rule that would allow the Attorney General to intervene in state bar disciplinary proceedings involving Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys would decrease transparency and fairness and undermine the rule of law. 

Prosecutors have a unique ethical responsibility in our criminal justice system. Unlike other attorneys, their duty is not simply to win cases but to seek justice on behalf of the public. The American Bar Association makes this clear in its professional standards, emphasizing that a prosecutor’s primary obligation is to pursue justice, not convictions. The U.S. Supreme Court has reinforced this principle, emphasizing that prosecutors represent the public and have a duty to ensure that justice, not just convictions, is achieved (Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78, 88 (1935)). 

Adhering to high ethical standards and maintaining public trust is not optional for prosecutors because they wield broad discretion over the lives of community members. Holding prosecutors ethically and legally accountable for their conduct is foundational to a functioning justice system. 

Research consistently shows that when people view legal authorities as legitimate, they are more likely to report crimes and cooperate with investigations. When that trust erodes, so does the ability of police and prosecutors to keep people safe.

That is why independent oversight and real accountability matter. No institution can effectively police itself in isolation. Across the country, state bar authorities promulgate ethical standards and discipline attorneys who violate them. This system sends a clear message: no lawyer is above the rules, and authorities will sanction misconduct promptly and fairly. This professional accountability is a critical foundation for maintaining the public trust, on which public safety depends.

The proposed rule exempting DOJ attorneys from this crucial process would disrupt that balance. It would allow the Attorney General, a political appointee, to indefinitely suspend state disciplinary investigations into federal prosecutors. The result is a troubling possibility: a two-tiered system in which federal prosecutors are shielded from the same accountability mechanisms that apply to all other lawyers, including state and local prosecutors. Federal prosecutors, like all other prosecutors, serve the people, and they must be held accountable through independent scrutiny and not merely internal oversight from a political appointee of the president. 

Disciplinary action against prosecutors is already rare, even in cases where courts have found prosecutorial misconduct that harmed defendants. Weakening one of the few existing forums for accountability risks further eroding public confidence in the fairness of the legal system.

At stake is the critical balance between prosecutorial independence and the external accountability needed to maintain public trust. FJP believes that accountability strengthens, rather than threatens, prosecutorial independence. A justice system that is transparent and fair, where rules are consistently applied, is one that earns the trust it depends on.

Preserving public trust requires strengthening oversight, not weakening it. That is why FJP opposes this proposed rule and calls for robust, independent accountability that ensures no prosecutor is above the law and that the justice system actors operate with the fairness, transparency, and integrity that communities deserve.