Republican attorney general nominee says taxpayers shouldn’t cover a governor’s personal defamation fight; Moore’s office calls the underlying suit baseless
By Michael Phillips | MDBayNews
ANNAPOLIS, Md. — Maryland’s Attorney General’s office will provide state-funded legal representation to Gov. Wes Moore in a personal defamation lawsuit, the Baltimore Sun reported Wednesday, drawing a sharp rebuke from the Republican nominee hoping to replace Attorney General Anthony Brown.
The lawsuit was filed in July by David D. Smith, co-owner of The Baltimore Sun and executive chairman of Sinclair Broadcast Group, over comments Moore made during a June 16 appearance on the MS NOW program “The Weeknight.” Smith’s complaint, filed in Anne Arundel County Circuit Court, says Moore falsely claimed Smith described the newspaper’s job as doing “Donald Trump’s work” and said he bought the Sun “to do Donald Trump’s work and to spread his message.” The complaint also says Moore separately claimed Smith “was invested in by Jeffrey Epstein.” Smith is suing Moore individually, not in his capacity as governor.
“That distinction is the center of the dispute.”
That distinction is the center of the dispute. Smith’s attorneys have argued they sued Moore as a private citizen, not as governor, and the Sun’s report Wednesday noted that whether taxpayer-funded lawyers should be defending him has “come under scrutiny.” Jim Rutledge, the Republican running against Brown this fall, went further in a statement Thursday, calling the arrangement “the work of a partisan operative.” He argued Moore made the disputed remarks on a national television program while campaigning, not from the State House, and shouldn’t bill Maryland families for them.
“Running for national office, he said, is not part of the job Marylanders elected Moore to do.”
Rutledge, a Maryland attorney for four decades and a former Bel Air town commissioner, said the Attorney General’s office should defend a governor only for conduct undertaken in an official capacity. Running for national office, he said, is not part of the job Marylanders elected Moore to do.
- Smith sued Moore individually on July 31 for defamation and false-light invasion of privacy.
- The Baltimore Sun reported Sept. 23 that Brown’s office would represent Moore in the case at state expense.
- Moore’s office has called the underlying claims baseless and said it would respond in court.
Moore has not backed off the comments. Before the suit was filed, his personal attorney, Joseph Sandler, told Smith’s lawyers in writing that the statements were accurate, pointing to Justice Department records showing Epstein-linked investment funds had held several hundred thousand dollars in Sinclair Broadcast Group stock while Smith served as the company’s chairman and chief executive. After Smith sued, the governor’s senior press secretary, Ammar Moussa, said “the claims in this lawsuit are baseless” and that the administration would address them in court.
The fight over Moore’s comments has already spilled into how state government interacts with the press. Several Maryland agencies confirmed to reporters in August that they were sending routine questions from Fox45 News, 7News in Washington, The Baltimore Sun and Spotlight on Maryland to legal review because of the Smith lawsuit, even on subjects such as prisons and child welfare that have nothing to do with the case. The governor’s office told those outlets in writing that it was routing “all media requests from Sinclair-affiliated outlets” for review. State officials have not explained why a private lawsuit against the governor changed how agencies answer public records and press questions.
“State officials have not explained why a private lawsuit against the governor changed how agencies answer public records and press questions.”
Rutledge used the state-funded defense to revive a broader argument he has made throughout the campaign: that Brown’s office has turned into a vehicle for national Democratic politics rather than a traditional law enforcement agency. Brown’s own office reported in January that its Federal Accountability Unit had led or joined more than 50 lawsuits against the Trump administration in its first year, plus dozens of amicus briefs, a combined tally that Maryland Matters put above 100 legal actions after a briefing with Brown. Rutledge’s campaign puts the running total higher, above 60 formal suits and more than 100 actions overall, a range roughly in line with what Brown’s office and Maryland Matters have separately reported since January. By contrast, Brown’s office did not file suit against the federal government at all during the Biden administration, and his predecessor, Brian Frosh, sued the first Trump administration around 95 times.
“Rutledge contrasted that record with what he called the office’s willingness to find an ‘official-duty theory’ when the person being defended is a Democrat with national ambitions, but a press conference when the target is a Republican administration.”
Rutledge contrasted that record with what he called the office’s willingness to find an “official-duty theory” when the person being defended is a Democrat with national ambitions, but a press conference when the target is a Republican administration.
Brown’s office has not publicly responded to Rutledge’s statement. Brown, a Democrat and former lieutenant governor, has held the Attorney General’s office since January 2023 and is seeking reelection this November against Rutledge.
What to Watch
Smith v. Moore is still in its early pretrial stages in Anne Arundel County Circuit Court. Whether the Attorney General’s office keeps representing Moore, or whether a judge, lawmakers, or the state’s public information laws force more clarity on how the arrangement is being paid for, will likely stay a live issue as the case proceeds and as the Brown-Rutledge race heads into its final weeks.
Sources: This report draws on the Baltimore Sun’s Sept. 23, 2026, report that Maryland’s Attorney General’s office will provide Gov. Wes Moore a state-funded defense in Smith v. Moore; Jim Rutledge’s campaign statement issued Sept. 24, 2026; Courthouse News Service’s coverage and copy of the original complaint, filed July 31, 2026, in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County; The Baltimore Banner’s July 15, 2026, reporting on the pre-suit correspondence between attorneys for David Smith and Gov. Moore; Fox45/Spotlight on Maryland’s Aug. 14, 2026, reporting on state agencies routing press inquiries to legal review; and the Maryland Attorney General’s office’s own January 2026 accounting of Federal Accountability Unit litigation, as previously reported by Maryland Matters.
Keep MDBayNews Reporting Free
MDBayNews exists to help Marylanders understand decisions made by state and local leaders — especially when those decisions affect daily life, rights, and public services.
If this article helped clarify what’s happening or why it matters, reader support makes it possible to keep publishing clear, independent reporting like this.
Have a tip or documents to share?
We review submissions carefully and confidentially. Anonymous tips are welcome when appropriate.
Discover more from Maryland Bay News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.