Maryland Attorney General Paid Donating Law Firms
The state paid $1.3 million to two firms that contributed to Attorney General Anthony Brown's campaign.
Updated on Sept. 29, 2026 in Criminal Justice

Live Poll
Should law firms be permitted to donate to campaigns of officials who award them government contracts?
Between 2023 and 2026, the Maryland Attorney General's office paid $1.3 million to Ballard Spahr LLP and Saul Ewing LLP. Both firms made campaign contributions to Anthony Brown, who assumed office in January 2023.
Why it matters
Questions regarding the intersection of campaign donations and state contracting remain as the office continues to employ numerous outside legal entities. These payments reflect a larger pool of contracts issued by the Attorney General's administration.
The Attorney General's office contracted with 81 outside legal entities during the administration, with five donating firms receiving a total of $30,250 in payments. Investigations into the selection process and billing rates, which reached $675 per hour, are ongoing.
The players
Anthony Brown
He is the current Attorney General of Maryland who assumed the position in January 2023.
Ballard Spahr LLP
This law firm received $985,000 in state contracts and donated $5,000 to the campaign of Anthony Brown.
Saul Ewing LLP
This law firm received $302,000 in state contracts and donated $12,000 to the campaign of Anthony Brown.
Katie Curran O'Malley
She was a candidate in the 2022 primary campaign who received $6,000 in donations from Saul Ewing LLP.
The details
The Maryland Attorney General's office paid Ballard Spahr LLP $985,000 and Saul Ewing LLP $302,000 for work conducted from 2023 through 2026. While both firms made campaign donations, the administration notes they were selected through a competitive bidding process and held contracts prior to Brown taking office.
Timeline
January 3, 2023: Anthony Brown assumed the office of Attorney General.
November 2, 2022: Ballard Spahr made a $2,500 campaign donation.
January 8, 2025: Ballard Spahr made a $2,500 campaign donation.
2023-2026: Contract period for the legal services provided.
Legal Context
The state's reliance on private firms follows a decades-long pattern of externalizing legal representation for major state projects and mandates. This practice extends the precedent established during the 1994 Bradford litigation against Maryland state schools.
Taxpayers remain affected by the transparency of state expenditures and the integrity of the competitive bidding process. Residents continue to seek accountability regarding how public funds are distributed among politically active law firms.
The takeaway
Public agencies are tasked with ensuring that outside legal contracts are awarded based on merit rather than campaign influence. Citizens should monitor state spending reports to ensure that public legal resources are managed with fiscal transparency.
Further reading
Learn more about the state's legal proceedings at Maryland Criminal Justice.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Big Country News.
Live Poll
Should law firms be permitted to donate to campaigns of officials who award them government contracts?










