City lawyers to judge: Toss IG lawsuit, block ‘unfettered access’ demand

BALTIMORE (WBFF) — The fight between Mayor Brandon Scott and the Office of Inspector General continues, and in the latest court filings, the mayor’s team argues the city’s watchdog is asking a judge to give her authority neither state lawmakers nor City Council have approved.

In the filing, the city’s Law Department asked the court to dismiss Inspector General Isabel Cumming’s lawsuit and deny her request for summary judgment. Attorneys for the city argued the OIG is attempting to obtain “unfettered access” to city records, attorney-client communications and taxpayer-funded legal representation without legal authority.

The latest filing is the newest development in a months-long dispute over whether the city’s watchdog can compel City Hall to turn over records without restrictions. Earlier this year, Cumming sued Mayor Brandon Scott and the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore after the administration began treating OIG subpoenas as requests under the Maryland Public Information Act, MPIA, allowing records to be redacted or withheld under state confidentiality laws.

One of the administration’s central arguments is that Cumming is asking the courts to grant authority that lawmakers declined to provide, pointing to bills introduced during the 2026 legislative session to exempt inspectors general from the MPIA. Those proposals failed.

However, Cumming, and other inspectors general in Maryland, maintain that access has always been there, and the newest MPIA interpretation by some administrations have hindered investigations.

“The IG supported multiple legislative enactments to try to give IGs rights that the plaintiffs are now arguing to this Court that the IG already possesses,” attorneys for the city wrote. “This court cannot give the IG rights the legislature has refused to entertain.”

That argument mirrors a position the Scott administration has maintained since the dispute began: if state law needs to change, it is up to lawmakers, not the court, to make those changes.

For years, Cumming has said her office has received unredacted records directly from city agencies. Earlier this year, however, the administration announced those requests would instead be processed under the MPIA. While Cumming has argued the change cripples her ability to investigate fraud, waste and abuse, Mayor Scott argues the opposite.

“The MPIA governs any request for documents from one governmental unit to another,” attorneys wrote, arguing the Inspector General is “subject to the MPIA” just like every other city agency.

The administration said granting the OIG’s request would effectively place the Inspector General “above the law” by allowing the office to obtain confidential and privileged records without the protections required under state law.

Once again, the Scott Administration is asking the judge to dismiss the case on procedural grounds.

Attorneys argued the Inspector General cannot sue the City because the OIG is not a legally separate entity.

“The Inspector General and Advisory Board are not legally distinct ‘persons’ from the City,” the filing argues, citing the City Charter, which states only the Mayor and City Council “may sue or be sued.”

The city further argues members of the OIG Advisory Board lack taxpayer standing because they have not demonstrated a direct financial injury that would allow them to pursue the lawsuit.

Mayor Scott’s legal team also challenged, again, the OIG’s use of outside legal counsel. The administration argues the Charter requires approval from the Mayor, the Board of Estimates and the City Solicitor before outside attorneys may be retained to represent a city agency.

But, a judge previously allowed the Inspector General to continue using pro bono attorneys while the lawsuit proceeds and declined the city’s earlier effort to remove them from the case.

The court has not yet ruled on the city’s motion to dismiss or on the competing motions for summary judgment, decisions that could determine not only the future of this lawsuit but also the scope of investigative authority for Baltimore’s Inspector General moving forward.

The OIG is expected to file a response in two weeks, and the case is set for a hearing on July 28.

Follow Political Reporter Mikenzie Frost on X and Facebook. Send tips to mbfrost@sbgtv.com.