My Involvement in the FBI Surveillance of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (and my Resulting Loss of a Friend)

Sherwin Markman • May 11, 2021

In my time working for Lyndon Johnson in the White House, I was given a variety of tasks to perform. Here are two of them that — in a very painful way — ultimately overlapped.



Very early each morning, an Army car and driver would arrive at my home in Bethesda. The driver would have a briefcase full of documents received overnight and meant for the president. My job was to read them all, summarize them, and see that they were delivered to the president no later than 8 a.m. 

 

Surprisingly often, the morning packet contained missives from J. Edgar Hoover, the long serving FBI director, concerning Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. They were detailed reports on the FBI’s long-standing spying on Dr. King that was first authorized by Robert Kennedy when he was his brother’s attorney general. All of them were classified “Top Secret” and at times contained this statement: “For the president’s eyes only.” Ignoring Hoover’s admonition, I read every one, faithfully summarized it, and, without objection, delivered them to the president.

 

They were all based upon Hoover’s premise that Dr. King was a risk to our national security because he was an agent of our mortal communist enemies. Thus, for example, on April 17, 1967, Hoover wrote: “[Dr. King] has not only been willing, but even eager to support communist causes…to associate with prominent communist leaders, and to work closely with and follow the advice and guidance of dedicated communists.”

 

Based on this statement, Hoover justified intense FBI spying on Dr. King, including bugging his hotel rooms and reporting on his sexual activities and those of his associates. And I read and faithfully fully summarized and delivered to the president each and every such Hoover document.

 

Much later, after I left the White House, I became aware of Hoover’s almost psychotic personal obsession with and hatred of Dr. King, and, most importantly, the falsity of his assertions that Dr. King was in any way disloyal or either a communist or a follower of communism. Nor was I aware of Director Hoover’s personal peccadillos that likely led him to those perversions of the truth. But, to my everlasting regret, at the time that I read and forwarded Hoover’s diatribes to the president, I accepted them as being the truth.





It was a late fall day and the president had summoned some of his staff to meet with him in the Cabinet room. There were 15 or so of us who constituted his personal assistants. I happened to be one of them, although I was pretty low on the totem pole of importance. 

 

What I remember most about that meeting was what the president brought up at its end. He began by bemoaning what he described as the “lack of insight” in the many reports he received concerning what was going in the nation’s Black ghettos.

 

“I don’t really know which of my programs are working and which are not — and why.” He went on, “I keep hearing about ‘Black Power.’ What is that all about?”

 

He continued in this vein for a while before he came to his point: “I have all these so-called experts and I’m loaded with their reports. But what I want is something entirely different. I want to hear from non-experts, from people who bring fresh, unspoiled views, and that means from one or more of you sitting in this room. I want you to go out and live in the ghettos for a time, and that doesn’t mean commuting from some hotel. Walk the streets, talk to as many people as possible, look at every one of my programs, and then come back and report about everything you saw and learned.”

 

When the meeting ended, I was the only one to follow the president back to the Oval Office. I told him I wanted to volunteer, and he was pleased. “Now, remember,” he said, “do NOT get into trouble. Do NOT get your name in the papers. NOBODY is to know you came from here.” “Yes, sir,” I replied, “but can you give me some guidance as to how I am to manage that?” Laughing, the president said, “I thought you were a bright young man. I’m sure you can figure all that out on your own.” And I was dismissed.

 

Returning to my office, I knew the only way I could even approach what the president needed was to find someone — an African American — to accompany me into America’s Black ghettos. But, I am mortified to say, I knew no one like that. However, I knew someone who did, one of my closest friends, Nick Kotz, a Washington reporter who often wrote about inner-city problems. Nick came introduced me to Ken Vallis, an African American born and raised in Chicago’s South Side ghetto who by dint of his own fine intelligence had left all that behind and was now a trusted employee of the U.S. Department of Labor.

 

Kenny was my age, and we instantly bonded. He eagerly accepted my invitation and, together, over the next 15 months, he and I lived and worked the president’s expressed wishes for periods of time in the ghettos of Chicago and Oakland. We lived in rooming houses, talked to people day and night, examined as many programs as possible, and, for me, absorbed the reality of inner-city life.

 

The president liked his memos short; one page was ideal. But returning from my first sojourn in Chicago, I was so full of impressions and thoughts that I couldn’t stop writing. In the end, my report covered seven single-spaced pages, but I couldn’t bring myself to cut any of it. So, with great trepidation, I submitted it to the president, fully expecting to be thoroughly dressed down.

 

But that didn’t happen. Instead, he was delighted and, I discovered, used my report as a tool. I remember how pleased I was when one day in the Cabinet Room, he pulled my memo out from his suit pocket and read parts of it to some congressmen in an effort to sway them regarding pending civil rights legislation.




After I left the White House, Kenny Vallis and I remained friends. From time to time, we would meet for lunch and, because we both loved the game, would spend an hour or so playing squash.

 

Because the two of us were also friends with Nick Kotz — by then a Pulitzer Prize winning reporter with the Washington Post — we would see each other at Nick’s home. It was there that our friendship came to an abrupt end.

 

Hoover's vendetta against Dr. King had become public knowledge — and drew widespread condemnation. As Nick, Ken, and I were discussing it, I casually mentioned that one of my jobs had been to read his reports. Kenny’s reaction was immediate, and angry. “Why didn’t you object?” he demanded. “Why didn’t you do something — like resign?” He would not accept my explanation that back then, I naively believed everything Hoover and the FBI submitted. I tried and tried, but I could not satisfy him.

 

In the end, Kenny would hear no more, and abruptly left Nick’s house. He never spoke to me again, and I forever lost a friend.

 

 

Sherwin Markman, a graduate of the Yale Law School, lives with his wife, Kathryn (Peggy) in Rock Hall, Maryland. He served as an assistant to President Lyndon Johnson, after which was a trial lawyer in Washington, D.C. He has published several books, including one dealing with the Electoral College. He has also taught and lectured about the American political system.

 

Common Sense for the Eastern Shore

By Jared Schablein, Shore Progress May 13, 2025
Let's talk about our Eastern Shore Delegation, the representatives who are supposed to fight for our nine Shore counties in Annapolis, and what they actually got up to this session.
By Markus Schmidt, Virginia Mercury May 12, 2025
For the first time in recent memory, Virginia Democrats have candidates running in all 100 House of Delegates districts — a milestone party leaders and grassroots organizers say reflects rising momentum as President Donald Trump’s second term continues to galvanize opposition.
Shore Progress logo
By Jared Schablein, Shore Progress April 22, 2025
The 447th legislative session of the Maryland General Assembly adjourned on April 8. This End of Session Report highlights the work Shore Progress has done to fight for working families and bring real results home to the Shore. Over the 90-day session, lawmakers debated 1,901 bills and passed 878 into law. Shore Progress and members supported legislation that delivers for the Eastern Shore, protecting our environment, expanding access to housing and healthcare, strengthening workers’ rights, and more. Shore Progress Supported Legislation By The Numbers: Over 60 pieces of our backed legislation were passed. Another 15 passed in one Chamber but not the other. Legislation details are below, past the budget section. The 2026 Maryland State Budget How We Got Here: Maryland’s budget problems didn’t start overnight. They began under Governor Larry Hogan. Governor Hogan expanded the state budget yearly but blocked the legislature from moving money around or making common-sense changes. Instead of fixing the structural issues, Hogan used federal covid relief funds to hide the cracks and drained our state’s savings from $5.5 billion to $2.3 billion to boost his image before leaving office. How Trump/Musk Made It Worse: Maryland is facing a new fiscal crisis driven by the Trump–Musk administration, whose trade wars, tariff policies, and deep federal cuts have hit us harder than most, costing the state over 30,000 jobs, shuttering offices, and erasing promised investments. A University of Maryland study estimates Trump’s tariffs alone could cost us $2 billion, and those federal cuts have already added $300 million to our budget deficit. Covid aid gave us a short-term boost and even created a fake surplus under Hogan, but that money is gone, while housing, healthcare, and college prices keep rising. The Trump–Musk White House is only making things worse by slashing funding, gutting services, and eliminating research that Marylanders rely on. How The State Budget Fixes These Issues: This year, Maryland faced a $3 billion budget gap, and the General Assembly fixed it with a smart mix of cuts and fair new revenue, while protecting working families, schools, and health care. The 2025 Budget cuts $1.9 billion ($400 million less than last year) without gutting services people rely on. The General Assembly raised $1.2 billion in fair new revenue, mostly from the wealthiest Marylanders. The Budget ended with a $350 million surplus, plus $2.4 billion saved in the Rainy Day Fund (more than 9% of general fund revenue), which came in $7 million above what the Spending Affordability Committee called for. The budget protects funding for our schools, health care, transit, and public workers. The budget delivers real wins: $800 million more annually for transit and infrastructure, plus $500 million for long-term transportation needs. It invests $9.7 billion in public schools and boosts local education aid by $572.5 million, a 7% increase. If current revenue trends hold, no new taxes will be needed next session. Even better, 94% of Marylanders will see a tax cut or no change, while only the wealthiest 5% will finally pay their fair share. The tax system is smarter now. We’re: Taxing IT and data services like Texas and D.C. do; Raising taxes on cannabis and sports betting, not groceries or medicine; and Letting counties adjust income taxes. The budget also restores critical funding: $122 million for teacher planning $15 million for cancer research $11 million for crime victims $7 million for local business zones, and Continued support for public TV, the arts, and BCCC The budget invests in People with disabilities, with $181 million in services Growing private-sector jobs with $139 million in funding, including $27.5 million for quantum tech, $16 million for the Sunny Day Fund, and $10 million for infrastructure loans. Health care is protected for 1.5 million Marylanders, with $15.6 billion for Medicaid and higher provider pay. Public safety is getting a boost too, with $60 million for victim services, $5.5 million for juvenile services, and $5 million for parole and probation staffing. This budget also tackles climate change with $100 million for clean energy and solar projects, and $200 million in potential ratepayer relief. Public workers get a well-deserved raise, with $200 million in salary increases, including a 1% COLA and ~2.5% raises for union workers. The ultra-wealthy will finally chip in to pay for it: People earning over $750,000 will pay more, Millionaires will pay 6.5%, and Capital gains over $350,000 get a 2% surcharge. Deductions are capped for high earners, but working families can still deduct student loans, medical debt, and donations. This budget is bold, fair, and built to last. That’s why Shore Progress proudly supports it. Click on the arrows below for details in each section.
By Friends of Eastern Neck Board of Directors April 16, 2025
Let your elected representatives and business and cultural leaders know that our Refuge and others like it all over the country deserve to be protected. They deserve our stewardship for the natural wonders they shelter, and because they provide refuge for people, too.
By Elaine McNeil April 9, 2025
The Budget Deficit In a recent debate on closing Maryland’s budget deficit, Minority Leader Jason Buckel, a Republican delegate from Allegany County, made an important point: “The man upstairs has only been there for two, three years. I don’t blame him for our economic failures of the last 10,” referring to Democratic Gov. Wes Moore, who was elected in 2022. Ahead of the 2026 gubernatorial elections, Buckel’s comments highlight a key reality that many of his Republican colleagues seldom admit: It isn’t right to blame Gov. Moore for a budget deficit that has been brewing for years. Now projected at $3.3 billion, Maryland’s structural deficit is a problem that started long before Moore took office. In fact, it was first projected in 2017, during the tenure of former GOP Gov. Larry Hogan. This isn’t an opinion — it’s a fact that Buckel and other lawmakers, including Republican Del. Jefferson Ghrist, have bravely acknowledged. During that same debate, Ghrist remarked that the Department of Legislative Services had warned about this deficit throughout Hogan’s administration, yet he did little to address it. Ghrist pointed out that during Maryland’s “good years,” when the state received a flood of federal covid-19 relief dollars, spending spiraled without regard for long-term fiscal health. Hogan used these one-time federal funds to support ongoing programs, which masked the true state of Maryland’s finances and created an illusion of fiscal stability. Hogan continues to take credit for the “surplus” Maryland had in 2022 — even though experts repeatedly note it was caused by the influx of federal dollars during the pandemic. As Ghrist correctly observed, the lack of fiscal restraint and slow growth during the Hogan years laid the groundwork for the $3.3 billion structural deficit the state faces today. Indeed, Maryland’s economy has been stagnant since 2017, especially in comparison to its neighboring states, well before Moore took office. Compounding these challenges are President Donald Trump’s reckless layoffs and trade wars with our allies. Thousands of federal workers who live in Maryland are losing their jobs, which will cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenue. Trump’s tariffs will also put an enormous strain on local businesses, including Eastern Shore farmers, who are now subject to up to 15% retaliatory tariffs on chicken, wheat, soybeans, corn, fruits, and vegetables. FY2026 Budget Considering this grim reality, Maryland’s lawmakers are making difficult, but necessary, decisions to shore up the state’s finances. Gov. Moore and state legislative leaders recently agreed to a budget that prioritizes expanding Maryland’s economy without raising taxes on most residents. In fact, 94% of Marylanders should see either a tax cut or no change at all to their income tax bill under the proposed agreement. Lawmakers also plan to cut government spending by the largest amount in 16 years, while at the same time making targeted investments in emerging industries, such as quantum computing and aerospace defense, so the state is less dependent on federal jobs. While the richest Marylanders might see their income taxes go up, it’s reasonable to ask someone making over $750,000 a year to pay $1,800 more to support law enforcement, strengthen our schools, and grow our economy. As for the proposed tax on data and IT services, these products aren’t subject to Maryland’s sales tax under current law. Maryland leaders want to modernize our tax code by levying a 3% sales tax on these products. Because they don’t raise income taxes on the majority of Marylanders and because state leaders are also cutting spending by billions, these ideas are fair. They’re also necessary after Gov. Hogan chose to kick the can down the road instead of addressing Maryland’s long-predicted deficit and now that Trump’s policies will lay off thousands of Marylanders and his tariffs will hurt our state. By making responsible choices now, Maryland leaders are putting the state on a path to long-term economic stability. Their decisions will help Maryland thrive, create jobs, and invest in the vital services that every resident relies on — without burdening hardworking families. I’m confident Maryland will emerge stronger, more resilient, and ready to lead in the industries of tomorrow. Elaine McNeil is chair of the Queen Anne’s Democratic Central Committee.
By John Christie April 2, 2025
Among Donald Trump’s most recent targets is what he calls “rogue law firms.” At 6pm last Thursday, March 27, he issued an Executive Order (EO) aimed at my old law firm, WilmerHale, as one of those “rogue” firms. Approximately 15 hours later, the firm filed a 63-page complaint challenging the EO on multiple constitutional grounds. The EO is an “unprecedented assault on the bedrock principle that one should not be penalized for merely defending or prosecuting a lawsuit” and constitutes an “undisguised form of retaliation for representing clients and causes Trump disfavors.” And by 8pm on Friday, March 28, a little over 24 hours after the EO was first issued, a federal district court judge in Washington granted a request for a temporary restraining order, blocking key provisions of the EO from taking effect for now. In doing so, the Court found that “the retaliatory nature of the EO is clear from its face. There is no doubt that it chills speech and legal advocacy and qualifies as a constitutional harm.” The Executive Order The EO and a so-called “Fact Sheet” that went with it recites that the Administration is committed to addressing the significant risks associated with law firms, particularly so-called “Big Law” firms that engage in conduct detrimental to critical American interests. Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP (WilmerHale) is yet another law firm said to have abandoned the legal profession’s highest ideals and abused its pro bono practice by engaging in activities that “undermine justice and the interests of the United States.” The specific examples offered in support of this conclusion: The EO asserts that WilmerHale “engages in obvious partisan representations to achieve political ends,” an apparent reference to the firm’s representation of Trump’s political opponents — namely the Democratic National Committee and the presidential campaigns of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. The EO cites WilmerHale’s “egregious conduct” in “supporting efforts to discriminate on the basis of race,” an apparent reference to the firm’s representation of Harvard in the Students for Fair Admissions litigation. The EO accuses WilmerHale of “backing the obstruction of efforts to prevent illegal aliens from committing horrific crimes,” an apparent reference to the firm’s litigation related pro bono practice and successful challenges to immigration related policies. The EO accuses WilmerHale of “furthering the degradation of the quality of American elections,” an apparent reference to the film’s involvement in challenges to restrictive state voter-identification and voter-registration laws. The EO singles out certain current and former WilmerHale partners, including Robert Mueller, for special criticism by describing Mr. Mueller’s investigation as “one of the most partisan investigations in American history” and having “weaponized the prosecutorial power to suspend the democratic process and distort justice.” The EO then Revokes security clearances held by WilmerHale attorneys; Prohibits the federal government from hiring WilmerHale employees absent a special waiver; Orders a review and the possible termination of federal contracts with entities that do business with the firm; Calls for the withdrawal of government goods or services from the firm; and Calls for restrictions on the ability of WilmerHale employees to enter federal buildings (presumably including federal courthouses) and on their “engaging” with government employees. WilmerHale’s Complaint WilmerHale engaged Paul Clement, a former Solicitor General during the George W. Bush administration and a well-known advocate frequently representing conservative causes, to represent the firm in this matter. Assisted by some 15 WilmerHale litigators, the complaint names the Executive Office of the President and 48 other Departments, Commissions, and individual Officers in their official capacity as defendants. A variety of constitutional violations are alleged: The First Amendment protects the rights of WilmerHale and its clients to speak freely, and petition the courts and other government institutions without facing retaliation and discrimination by federal officials. The separation of powers limits the President’s role to enforcing the law and no statute or constitutional provision empowers him to unilaterally sanction WilmerHale in this manner. The EO flagrantly violates due process by imposing severe consequences without notice or an opportunity to be heard. The EO violates the right to counsel protected by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments and imposes unconstitutional conditions on federal contracts and expenditures. The complaint alleges that WilmerHale has already suffered irreparable damage in the 16 hours since the EO issued. The firm has been vilified by the most powerful person in the country as a “rogue law firm” that has “engaged in conduct detrimental to critical American interests. The EO will inevitable cause extensive, lasting damage to WilmerHale’s current and future business prospects. The harm to the firm’s reputation will negatively affect its ability to recruit and retain employees. Further Proceedings Temporary restraining orders constitute emergency relief upon a showing of likely success on the merits and irreparable harm were the temporary relief not entered. A later hearing will be held in order for the judge to determine whether a preliminary injunction should be issued preventing the government from executing the EO during the continued length of the litigation. Editorial Note: In light of the recent capitulation of several “Big Law” firms to the unreasonable and unconstitutional attacks by the Trump administration, WilmerHale is providing a blueprint for resistance as it fights back. More law firms need to be inspired by WilmerHale’s response to Trump’s demand for revenge on his so-called political enemies. John Christie was for many years a senior partner in a large Washington, D.C. law firm. He specialized in anti-trust litigation and developed a keen interest in the U.S. Supreme Court about which he lectures and writes.
Show More