Trump Officials Accused of Intimidating
D.C. Advocacy Group for Internet Freedom

     The Trump administration is accused in a new lawsuit in Washington, D.C. of trying to squelch media rights of a nonprofit organization that receives grants from the U.S. government.
     The Washington-based Open Technology Fund says the Trump administration is trying to intimidate it, perhaps to gain greater influence over its work with Internet organizations. The intimidation allegedly includes a threat to cut off its grant money.
     The Open Technology Fund is an advocacy organization for an open forum on the Internet with no encryption, particularly in developing countries. Many of the Internet-based organizations that Open Technology Fund assists are part of the news media.
     It also is a grantee of the U.S. Agency for Global Media, which oversees Voice of America and other government media enterprises.
     The Agency for Global Media has been trying to get its own appointees onto the Open Technology Fund’s board of directors but the nonprofit organization has refused to recognize their authority, thereby rendering the nonprofit nearly unable to operate.​

 ​​​Continue Reading

D.C. in Brief

We Could Use Your Help

     Thousands of DC residents need a lawyer, but can’t afford one. They could be illegally evicted from their homes, lose custody of their children, experience domestic violence, and more, all because they lack legal representation. 
      You could make a difference. By making a donation to the Legal Aid Society of the District of Columbia, you will provide free, high-quality, zealous legal representation to low-income DC residents. Click the photo above to make a donation today. 
      Your support could prevent homelessness, domestic violence, hunger, or family separation. In fact, if just 10 people who see this ad give $28 to Legal Aid, it will be enough to staff an experienced attorney at the courthouse for a day.
      That way, DC residents like Keith King (pictured above) can get the legal representation they need to win their cases. As Mr. King put it, if it wasn’t for his Legal Aid lawyer, “I would have been homeless again.”
     Here is the link to the Legal Aid website for donations:

     For more information, contact Rob Pergament at Legal Aid at

D.C. Court of Appeals Considers
Admitting Attorneys Without Exam

     The D.C. Court of Appeals is considering whether to grant recent law school graduates licenses to practice without a need for a bar exam.
     The proposal is a response to the coronavirus pandemic that has killed nearly 6,500 people in Washington, Maryland and Virginia. In-person tests create too much of a risk to the health and lives of the test-takers and others, according to the Court of Appeals.
     Other states are considering similar plans, which prompted delegates to the American Bar Association’s annual meeting to debate the idea this week at their virtual annual meeting.
     The Court of Appeals is soliciting public comment on the proposal for the next week.
     If the law grads receive the “diploma privilege,” it would be a short-term measure. They still would be required to pass the bar exam at a later date.
     The D.C. Bar still plans to hold its online exam Oct. 5 and Oct. 6. Public comments the Court of Appeals is receiving could alter the exam schedule.
     The court asks interested parties to address the following issues in their comments:
     -- “What specific needs of prospective lawyers, clients and employers would be addressed by granting a diploma privilege or expanding the scope of temporary practice? What specific concerns would be raised by taking either step?”
     -- “What limits or conditions should be imposed on any diploma privilege or expanded temporary practice?”
     -- “What role can or should law schools and the Bar play in addressing these issues?
     Comments must be submitted by August 12. They can be submitted electronically to, or in writing, addressed to the Clerk, D.C. Court of Appeals, 430 E Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20001.


Congress Reviews Police Actions
Against Portland and D.C. Protesters

     Recent police action against protesters in Lafayette Square near the White House fell under criticism during two congressional hearings last week.
     Some accusations of wrongdoing were directed at U.S. Attorney General William Barr, who Democratic lawmakers accused of abusing his authority by authorizing excessive force against Black Lives Matter demonstrators.
     “Shame on you, Mr. Barr,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y.
     The Black Lives Matter movement was prompted by the killing of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer on May 25.
     Barr described Floyd’s killing as a “horrible” event but said it was not a primary reason for the ongoing violence.
     “Largely absent from these scenes of destruction are even superficial attempts by the rioters to connect their actions to George Floyd’s death or any legitimate call for reform,” Barr said. 
     In a separate congressional hearing, the House Natural Resources Committee reviewed actions by U.S. Park Police to remove protesters from Lafayette Square on June 1. Police removed them with smoke bombs and pepper balls shortly before President Donald Trump, accompanied by Barr, walked in front of a nearby church for a photo opportunity in which he held up a Bible.
     Adam DeMarco, a major in the District of Columbia National Guard, described the actions of Park Police as “unprovoked” and “excessive.”
     “Having served in a combat zone, and understanding how to assess threat environments, at no time did I feel threatened by the protesters or assess them to be violent,” DeMarco said in his testimony.
     DeMarco’s observations were sharply contradicted by Acting U.S. Park Police Chief Gregory Monahan.
     He said protesters threw “bricks, rocks, caustic liquids, water bottles, lit flares, fireworks” at police. He said 50 officers were injured but acknowledged under questioning from lawmakers that only one was hurt during the June 1 conflict.


Legal Briefs

Judge Defines Bitcoin as Money
Under D.C. Money Laundering Law

     A federal judge’s recent ruling gave prosecutors in the District of Columbia a new tool for pursuing money launderers by redefining bitcoin as a form of currency.
     The ruling was based on the prosecution of a man who tried to evade criminal charges after he allegedly transferred more than 350,000 of his customers’ bitcoins to retailers in a way they could not be traced to a source.
     In other words, he sought to conceal the bitcoin transfers to retailers to purchase guns, drugs and other illegal items on the darknet, according to an indictment.
     The darknet is a network of underground websites that require special authorizations and software to gain access. 
     The suspect, Larry Dean Harmon, was prosecuted under the District of Columbia’s Money Transmitters Act. The indictment accused him of running an unlicensed money transmitting business in Washington that operated under the name of Helix.
     Continue Reading

Letters to the Editor

800 4th Street SW, No. N517   Washington, DC 20024
Phone: 240-421-6395   E-mail:

    The Legal Forum welcomes letters to the editor at, which will be published here.

Latest News

Power the Civil Rights Work of Our Time

     Each day members of our community are experiencing wage theft, the effects of gentrification, discriminatory policing, collateral consequences, marginalization in schools, and barriers to public accommodations. 
     We fight alongside people facing the effects of gentrification like Amira Moore. Our work empowers the people and communities who need it most, “We can do more than we think. There’s a path to equity, we just have to step to it.” –Ms. Moore
     For more than 50 years, the Washington Lawyers’ Committee has been on the frontlines of the fight for civil rights in our community. We deploy the best legal talent, we tackle the tough cases, we fight, and we win. 
     Our work is as important today as it has ever been. Through your support, you can play a role in creating justice for thousands of marginalized members of our community. Together, we will dismantle injustice and pursue lasting change.
     Join us! Donate & subscribe:
     Volunteer with us:
     For more information, contact Gregg Kelley at​

About Us  

The Legal Forum is a news service for the Washington area's legal community that also offers job listings and grant writing for eligible nonprofits organizations. If you have questions, or you would like to place an ad, please Contact Us

D.C. Quarantine Order Creates Challenge
For Privileges and Immunities Clause

     District of Columbia Mayor Muriel Bowser’s quarantine order that took effect last week is stepping into an unsettled area of Constitutional law that touches on travelers’ rights.
     Bowser ordered that visitors traveling to Washington from "high-risk areas" for non-essential purposes must self-quarantine for 14 days before going out publicly.
     The order defines “high-risk” as locations with a seven-day moving average of 10 or more new coronavirus cases per 100,000 residents. California, Florida and Texas are examples.
     Anyone violating the order could face 90 days in jail and a $5,000 fine. City officials plan to publish their list of high-risk areas every two weeks on
     Although a court challenge to a quarantine order held up to a challenge by a South Carolina man visiting Hawaii, others are pending.

Continue Reading