The legal disciplinary board for California attorneys has approved a recommendation that former law professor John Eastman be disbarred for his role in efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results in favor of President Donald Trump.
On Friday, a three-judge panel from the California State Bar Court’s Review Department ruled on two separate requests by Eastman and the Office of Chief Trial Counsel to review a March 2024 decision recommending that he lose his law license.
The panel, which functions as a court of appeals in California’s lawyer discipline system, declined to overturn the lower court’s decision.
“Attorneys have a fundamental obligation to be truthful and to uphold the rule of law,” Chief Trial Counsel George Cardona stated.”John Eastman violated this obligation when, at the request of his client, now-President Donald Trump, he launched a calculated campaign to falsely undermine the results of the 2020 presidential election, which then-candidate Trump lost. In doing so, Mr. Eastman lied to the courts, Vice President Mike Pence, and the American people.”
Eastman is currently ineligible to practice law, according to his profile with The State Bar of California.
The former law professor was indicted twice, once in Georgia and again in Arizona, for promoting the bogus legal theory that then-Vice President Mike Pence had the authority to overturn the 2020 election results on January 6, 2021, by accepting “alternate slates of electors.”
In January 2023, a disciplinary case was filed against Eastman for his involvement in Donald Trump’s election interference.
Following a March 2024 ruling in which a judge stated that the “scale and egregiousness of Eastman’s unethical actions” outweighed those of a Watergate-era attorney for Richard Nixon, his law license was suspended.
While State Bar Court Judge Yvette D. Roland recommended Eastman’s disbarment, the entire process has yet to be completed.
In April 2024, Eastman filed a 50-page motion with the California State Bar’s Office of Chief Trial Counsel requesting a stay of the judge’s order recommending his disbarment, pleading with the court to allow him to practice his profession and represent his clients.
Several days later, bar officials responded, saying the pleading was “stunningly deficient” in lifting the ban.
In May 2024, Roland issued a terse order rejecting the leniency request, citing the “gravity of Eastman’s transgressions, particularly those involving moral turpitude, and the increased likelihood of future misconduct due to his refusal to acknowledge any wrongdoing.”
In the original 128-page disbarment recommendation, Eastman was found guilty of ten out of eleven charges.
Eastman attempted to appeal his ten losses and the overall disbarment recommendation; the state bar’s counsel attempted to appeal the dismissal of the eleventh count as well as the rejection of an aggravation allegation based on the notion that Eastman caused significant harm.
Following oral arguments on March 19, both sides lost their appeals, and Roland’s opinion remains unchanged.
Now, either party can request a review from the California Supreme Court.
While his disbarment recommendation stands, Eastman remains involuntarily inactive.
“As the Review Department’s Opinion holds, for this conduct disbarment is both appropriate and necessary,” Cardona remarked. “This opinion serves as a powerful and timely reminder that whoever they are and whoever they represent, attorneys must remain true to the ethical rules that govern their conduct and respect the rule of law.”
