Ex-Bush official Scott Bloch was granted a law license last year after the staff of a DC court didn't notice that he is under criminal investigation by the FBI -- and failed to flag that fact to the Committee on Admissions, despite extensive documentation provided by Bloch.
He now practices at a business law firm in the District he joined several months ago. The clerk of the court for the D.C. Court of Appeals revealed the error to TPMmuckraker today after we inquired about the case.
In October 2008, Bloch ended a rocky tenure leading the Office of Special Counsel during the Bush Administration that was marked by charges of retaliation against his employees and politicization of the agency in charge of protecting the rights of federal workers.
But one scandal refused to go away: while being probed for the alleged retaliation, he allegedly destroyed evidence and, investigating Bloch for obstruction of justice, the FBI raided his home and office.
In the months before Bloch left the administration, he applied for a law license in the District of Columbia, which was granted in November; several months ago he joined DC-based Tarone & McLaughlin LLP.
All of which made us wonder: wouldn't the body in charge of granting law licenses in the District think twice before admitting a man who was under criminal investigation -- for obstruction of justice no less?
It turns out, they might have -- had they noticed.
The staff in charge of reviewing Bloch's application for a license blundered, overlooking documents he submitted about the criminal probe, the clerk of the court of the DC Court of Appeals tells TPMmuckraker. After the breakdown, his application sailed through. Now he's practicing in the District and even touting on his law firm bio the "notoriety" he attained during the Bush years. Meanwhile, the criminal probe goes on.
Here's how the failure happened: Bloch wrote the office of admissions of the DC Court of Appeals in May 2008 notifying them he was under investigation, even providing relevant subpoenas.
At that point, what "should have happened and didn't" is that the matter of the criminal probe be flagged as a possible issue by the staff to the lawyers who make up the Committee on Admissions, says Clerk of the Court Garland Pinkston.
Pinkston blames "staff oversights" for the error and notes a small group of people are processing 3,500 applications a year.
Up to a point, Bloch's situation was a lot like the case Kyle Sampson, another ex-Bushie currently under investigation who is also practicing law in Washington. But in Sampson's case, the Committee on Admissions of the DC Court of Appeals noticed the ongoing probe and refused to grant him a law license. He was able to wrangle his way into practice only after an intense lobbying campaign on his behalf and intervention by a three-judge panel.
What would have happened if the criminal probe of Bloch was brought to the attention of the Committee on Admissions? Pinkston tells TPMmuckraker it's "difficult to say." But he calls the Kyle Sampson situation an "analogy."
In other words, Bloch may well have been refused a license, pending the completion of the criminal investigation. And we could have seen a court fight just like in the Sampson case, from which Bloch may or may not have emerged with a law license.
Where does all this leave us? Pinkston says there's nothing to be done. "You can't take a person's license because they're under investigation."
As for the staff blunder, he said he plans to "use this as a teaching exercise."
Late Update: We've put in calls to Bloch and a named partner at his firm for their reaction to the DC Court of Appeals blunder. We'll let you know if we hear back.

TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com

phelicity
September 18, 2009 2:10 PM
Staff 'blunders' are teaching exercises? People don't lie, they 'misspeak?' The entire implosion of our economy, according to CNBC brain-deads, was simply an accumulation of 'mistakes,' -fraud being simply 'inadequate representation of facts?' When, or will it ever end.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Beautiful Mind of Barbara Bush
September 18, 2009 2:30 PM
Fun fact: Not being able to pay your student loans will keep you from being admitted in D.C.--so you will have no way of getting a job to pay them off. They say that having unresolved debts shows character defects that render you unfit to practice law. You could be a danger to clients. But being under CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION? Hey, no problem! Because people who have no respect for the law are just the sort of people you want representing clients and having access to their money! Way to go, D.C.!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Christov
September 18, 2009 2:47 PM
Most likely, someone in charge looked back at the hell they went through with Sampson, thought, "I don't want to do that again" and waved the application on through.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
EH
September 18, 2009 2:57 PM
So how many others were admitted to the DC bar with similar-or-worse histories? Doesn't sound like they have much of a filter.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Robert MacLean
September 18, 2009 3:51 PM
Amazing! I can't even get a rent-a-cop job to guard J.C. Pennys, but Scott Bloch gets his law license and a job with a law firm.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
stevelaudig
September 19, 2009 3:17 AM
Take a look at the application Bloch filled out to see if it required that he disclose that he was under investigation. Also almost anyone can file a complaint that seeks revocation of the license for uncharged misconduct.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Justin Elliott
September 19, 2009 11:34 AM in reply to stevelaudig
The applications are actually not publicly available, I'm told.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Mrs Panstreppon
September 19, 2009 9:33 AM
Pretty big oversight on the Clerk's part. Any chance it wasn't an oversight?
The Tarone and the McLaughlin in Tarone & McLaughlin are conservatives. No surprise there. Tarone is a regent of the Fund for American Studies and McLaughlin was in the first Bush administration.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
serge
September 19, 2009 10:06 AM
After many decades in legal administration, I cannot believe that they just "missed" this. This doesn't happen. Or, I guess, with some unattributable help, it might happen...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Roger
September 19, 2009 9:04 PM
Excellent! Now they can disbar him!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Continuum
September 20, 2009 6:02 PM
Do you really believe that it was a staff blunder that allowed the Bushie criminal to get his law license in DC? Do you honestly believe that?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?