Attorney John Eastman, a key figure in Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election, is facing potential disbarment following a recommendation from a California State Bar Court judge due to “serious ethical violations.” The judge found Eastman guilty of making false claims about then-Vice President Mike Pence’s authority to delay or refuse to certify electoral votes on Jan. 6, 2021. The final decision on Eastman’s disbarment will rest with the California Supreme Court.
Eastman appeared dismissive of the case against him, stating that the disagreement on the facts of the 2020 election and constitutional interpretation should not be the basis for disciplinary action. However, Judge Yvette Roland argued that Eastman’s actions went beyond ethical boundaries and lacked evidentiary or legal support. She recommended his disbarment to protect the public and maintain confidence in the legal system.
Following the recommendation, Eastman’s law license has been placed on “involuntary inactive” status pending the California Supreme Court’s final decision. He has requested that the order be stayed due to high legal costs, emphasizing that losing his ability to practice law would hinder his defense in other cases, including a probe in Fulton County, Georgia, where he is a co-defendant with Trump. Eastman denies any wrongdoing in these cases.
In a recent interview, Eastman disclosed that he had been served a subpoena for his communications, including those with Trump, by U.S. Capitol Police officers who are suing the former president over injuries sustained during the January 6 insurrection. Eastman referred to these legal challenges as part of the “game” aimed at diverting resources from election efforts. He expressed concerns about being unable to contribute to election-related activities if resources were tied up in his legal defense.
Eastman’s comments suggest a defiant stance against the allegations and legal proceedings he faces regarding his role in attempting to overturn the 2020 election results. Despite the potential disbarment and other legal challenges, he maintains his innocence and portrays the cases against him as distractions meant to impede his participation in future election efforts. The outcome of his disbarment hearing and other pending cases will determine the course of his legal career and involvement in electoral activities moving forward.
