A judge in California has recommended that conservative attorney John Eastman be disbarred in the state for his involvement in developing a legal strategy aimed at helping former President Donald Trump remain in power following his defeat in the 2020 election. The judge’s ruling followed a 128-page decision issued by State Bar Court of California Judge Yvette Roland on Wednesday. Eastman’s law license is set to be placed on “involuntary inactive” status three days after the ruling, pending a final decision by the California Supreme Court.
The recommendation for Eastman’s disbarment also includes a directive for him to pay $10,000 in monetary sanctions to the State Bar of California Client Security Fund. Roland’s ruling emphasized that the disciplinary action against Eastman was not motivated by his political beliefs or representation of President Trump, but rather stemmed from serious ethical violations that warranted strict professional consequences.
Eastman’s attorney, Randy Miller, defended his client’s actions, stating that Eastman’s legal assessment post the 2020 election was based on established legal precedent, constitutional research, and scholarly material. Miller highlighted that attorneys are ethically obligated to vigorously advocate for their clients, a principle Eastman adheres to without question. Despite the ruling, Miller expressed confidence that the Review Court would address any perceived curtailment of this principle swiftly.
Aside from the recommendation for disbarment in California, Eastman, a former law school dean, is entangled in multiple legal proceedings related to election interference. He faces criminal charges in Georgia for allegedly conspiring with Trump and allies to overturn the state’s 2020 election results. Additionally, Eastman is linked to an election interference case brought by the Justice Department, although he has not been charged as one of the unnamed co-conspirators in the indictment.
In light of these legal challenges, Eastman remains resolute in defending his actions and legal strategies implemented in the aftermath of the 2020 election. The unfolding legal battles underscore the contentious aftermath of the election and the ongoing scrutiny faced by individuals involved in efforts to challenge the legitimacy of the results. The implications of these legal proceedings extend beyond Eastman, illustrating the far-reaching consequences of actions taken in the wake of a hotly contested election.