On March 27th, a state bar judge in California made the decision to disbar John Eastman. He was a co-defendant alongside former President Donald Trump in the case involving the alleged subversion of Georgia’s 2020 election.
According to Judge Yvette Roland’s 128-page ruling, Eastman’s actions are considered extremely serious ethical violations that deserve severe professional consequences.
During Donald Trump’s time in the White House, Eastman served as one of his lawyers. In the Georgia case, Eastman, along with 19 other defendants, including the former president himself, is accused of being part of a conspiracy to overturn President Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election. This conspiracy ultimately led to the attack on Congress on January 6, 2021.
According to reports, the Nebraska native is known for playing a significant role in the plan to substitute legitimate Biden electors with fraudulent Trump electors across various swing states. His alleged involvement includes promoting the notion that Vice President Mike Pence had the power to postpone or halt the certification of Joe Biden as the 46th President of the United States.
The defendant has entered a plea of not guilty to the charges.
In September 2021, the State Bar of California initiated an investigation into Eastman regarding the 11 disciplinary charges filed against him in January 2023.
After a trial lasting over 35 days, which included the testimony of 23 witnesses and the presentation of more than 700 exhibits, Roland delivered her judgment on Wednesday. In her ruling, she found Eastman guilty of 10 disciplinary charges related to failing to provide support.
Roland accused Eastman of spreading false and misleading information about the 2020 presidential election and Vice President Pence’s authority to delay or refuse the counting of certified electoral votes. According to Roland, Eastman made these statements during court filings, public remarks, and conversations with others.
He made these statements with different degrees of intent, but they were all aimed at casting doubt on the legitimate election results and supporting the baseless claim that the presidency was stolen from his client. He relied on his credentials as an attorney and constitutional scholar to give credibility to his unfounded claims.
According to her, Eastman’s absence of remorse and accountability poses a substantial risk that he may partake in additional unethical behavior, which could potentially endanger the public.
In a statement on Wednesday, Eastman strongly criticized the ruling and questioned the legitimacy of the trial. He expressed his intention to appeal the decision, even if it means taking the case all the way to the Supreme Court. Eastman believes that this legal battle, which he refers to as “lawfare,” poses a significant threat to the First Amendment and the right to provide legal representation for controversial clients and causes.
Eastman’s legal representation at Miller Law Associates claims that his actions after the November 2020 election were typical of lawyers who fervently advocate for their clients on a daily basis.
The law firm expressed confidence that the review court will promptly address any limitations on the principle with regards to today’s decision.
Chief Trial Counsel George Cardona expressed his satisfaction with the outcome, celebrating his victory. He emphasized that the court’s ruling confirmed that Eastman had not only consistently failed to fulfill his obligation to uphold the Constitution and the rule of law but also posed a threat to the fundamental principles of democracy.
According to a statement by Cardona, Mr. Eastman, as an attorney, neglected his ethical and legal responsibilities when he collaborated with former President Donald Trump. Their objective was to create and execute a plan to impede the counting of electoral votes on January 6, 2021, and unlawfully disrupt the peaceful transfer of power to President-elect Joseph Biden. It is important to note that they were aware that there was no valid justification or legal argument to lawfully challenge the electoral votes of any state or delay the electoral count on January 6.
Mr. Eastman’s attempts were unsuccessful solely due to the resilience of our democratic institutions and the unwavering dedication of those who uphold them. The repercussions of Mr. Eastman neglecting his responsibilities as a lawyer, along with the peril his actions posed to our democracy, justify his disbarment.
Read More:
- Poll: Half of voters want to cut electric vehicle sales targets
- Taxpayers to provide $1,000 monthly ‘guaranteed income’ across the state, according to proposal