BALTIMORE — Baltimore Inspector General Isabel Mercedes Cumming is pushing back on the city’s request to disqualify her attorneys in a lawsuit against City Hall, arguing that Baltimore officials are attempting to curtail her authority.

In a Tuesday filing in Baltimore Circuit Court, attorneys for Cumming argue that the independent Office of the Inspector General, not the city, is the client, and it’s up to the court to determine whether the inspector general is allowed to retain conflict-free representation.

The city maintains that only it can represent the inspector general, even when its legal position conflicts with the watchdog office. The IG’s attorneys ask how that’s possible.

“In doing so, the City Law Department is not acting in the OIG’s best interests; it is elevating the interests of other agencies over the OIG,” the filing states.

A question of attorney conduct

Maryland’s rules governing attorney conduct further support the need for Cumming to have independent legal counsel, the filing contends.

To illustrate the stakes, the filing lays out a hypothetical scenario in which the inspector general investigates alleged fraud involving an attorney in the city Law Department. If the solicitor refused to turn over materials by asserting attorney-client privilege, the filing argues, the inspector general would be unable to pursue the inquiry.

“Instead, the OIG must accept as gospel, and the OIG has no means to challenge the City Solicitor’s legal assertions in a court of competent jurisdiction,” the filing said. “That is not the independence that the City Council and the Baltimore electorate envisioned.”

The city’s position

Earlier this month, attorneys for the city argued that Cumming can’t sue them in her position with the government. The city argues that under the charter, only the city solicitor has the authority to represent Baltimore in legal matters and to decide when outside legal counsel can be hired.

The use of outside counsel also requires approval from the mayor, city solicitor and the Board of Estimates, city officials argued. But because that approval wasn’t granted, the city believes that Cumming’s attorneys should be disqualified and that their representation of her violates attorney conduct rules.

“City government can’t sue city government,” Mayor Brandon Scott said earlier this month following a Board of Estimates meeting. “We understand and want the IG to be independent in doing her work. That means independent of political interference from anyone to do the work we appreciate. however, we have to understand very clearly is that the IG is not independent of city government. She’s a part of city government.”

The broader context

The escalating dispute stems from a lawsuit Cumming filed in February after the city’s law department redacted names and payment details from records provided to her office. At the time, Cumming argued that the redactions interfered with her ability to investigate potential waste, fraud and abuse in city government.

The situation underscores ongoing tensions about the scope of the inspector general’s authority. Previously approved charter amendments have clarified what powers the role holds. In 2018, Baltimore voters approved a measure creating an independent inspector general’s office and granting it subpoena powers. And in 2022, city voters approved the creation of an independent board to oversee the inspector general, eliminating political influence.

A hearing on the city’s request to dismiss the case and Cumming’s request to regain direct access to documents is set for Friday.

________

©2026 The Baltimore Sun. Visit at baltimoresun.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.