Baltimore Inspector General access remains at the center of a growing court fight after Maryland’s appellate court rejected another emergency request from City Hall. The Scott administration wanted new restrictions on the watchdog’s access to municipal systems while its broader appeal continues, as reported by Baltimore Chronicle.
Maryland appellate court denies Baltimore’s protective order
The Appellate Court of Maryland denied the City’s request for a protective order on October 1.
City attorneys argued that restoring previous system permissions could expose privileged attorney-client communications. They also cited legal work product connected to the ongoing litigation.
The appellate panel rejected the emergency request. It pointed to an existing prohibition preventing the Office of Inspector General from reviewing protected material.
The court also said it appears Baltimore can determine whether the OIG violates that restriction.
The ruling does not decide Baltimore’s underlying appeal. That case concerns Judge Pamela White’s September 21 order requiring restoration of OIG access.
Why Baltimore City sought another emergency order
Judge White ordered the City to restore permissions previously held by Assistant Inspector General Bryan Bartsch. The deadline followed months of litigation involving Inspector General Isabel Mercedes Cumming and Mayor Brandon Scott’s administration.
City Hall later argued that its technology could not restore Bartsch’s former permissions while isolating litigation-related privileged material.
The OIG challenged that claim.
Bartsch stated in an affidavit that activity performed with his administrative permissions is logged. He cited the City’s Splunk system, which retains user and device activity records.
The dispute therefore centers on 2 competing technical claims:
- City attorneys say privileged litigation material cannot be reliably isolated.
- The OIG says administrator activity can be recorded and audited.
- Bartsch has also said he will not access protected litigation materials.
The appellate court did not independently declare either technological argument correct. Its order said only that the City appears able to determine whether prohibited access occurs.
Court fight continues despite latest ruling
The legal dispute now has several proceedings moving at once.
| Proceeding | Current status |
|---|---|
| September 21 access order | Issued by Judge Pamela White |
| City appeal | Still pending |
| Emergency stay request | Denied |
| Protective order request | Denied |
| OIG contempt request | Still before Circuit Court |
The September 21 order required Baltimore to restore OIG system permissions and begin producing records responsive to outstanding subpoenas.
A September 25 appellate ruling also found that Baltimore had not demonstrated irreparable harm sufficient to justify another stay.
OIG seeks contempt finding over access dispute
The Office of Inspector General has separately asked Judge White to hold the City in constructive civil contempt.
The filing alleges that full access was not restored by the required deadline. The OIG has requested a daily financial penalty until compliance occurs.
No contempt finding has been entered, and no daily fine has been imposed.
The Scott administration has retained Baltimore attorney William H. “Billy” Murphy Jr. for the contempt proceedings. The Mayor’s Office said outside counsel was brought in to avoid the appearance of a conflict for City attorneys. Details about Murphy’s compensation have not been publicly confirmed.
The next significant decision will concern either the pending contempt dispute or Baltimore’s underlying appeal. Until then, the appellate court’s latest order leaves the existing restrictions on privileged material in place without granting City Hall the broader protective order it requested.
Earlier we wrote about How to register to vote in Maryland before the Oct. 13 deadline for the 2026 election