(CN) — A California State Bar judge ruled on Wednesday that former Donald Trump attorney John Eastman, one the chief architects of a plan to get former Vice President Mike Pence and other officials to overturn the 2020 election, should be disbarred.
"Eastman failed to uphold his primary duty of honesty and breached his ethical obligations by presenting falsehoods to bolster his legal arguments," wrote Judge of the State Bar Court Yvette Roland in her 128-page ruling, saying that Eastman had also "deliberately propagated false claims about the 2020 presidential election, thereby breaching his ethical duty as an attorney to prioritize honesty and integrity."
"Acts of moral turpitude are a departure from professional norms and are unequivocally outside the realm of protection afforded by the First Amendment and the obligation of vigorous advocacy," she added.
The judge also recommended that Eastman be fined $10,000.
The ruling will be reviewed by the state's Supreme Court. In the meantime, Eastman will be placed on inactive status, meaning that he will not be licensed to practice law.
The Orange County attorney, a constitutional scholar who once clerked for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, wrote two memos arguing that the election had been stolen by Democrats by the electronic manipulation of voting tabulation machines. He urged then-Vice President Mike Pence to delay the election's certification and suggested that state legislators could appoint alternative slates of pro-Trump electors. This, he said, could lay the groundwork for Pence to reverse the election results by selecting the alternative slates.
In their notice of disciplinary charges filed against Eastman, lawyers for the California State Bar wrote that in writing the memos, Eastman had "committed an act involving moral turpitude, dishonesty, and corruption."
Eastman repeated many of his claims about the election being stolen in front of an angry crowd gathered outside the Capitol on Jan. 6, shortly before they invaded the building in the hope of forcing Pence to delay the certification vote. State Bar lawyers wrote that in the speech, Eastman had "made false and misleading statements that contributed to provoking the crowd to assault and breach the Capitol in an effort to intimidate Pence and prevent the electoral count from proceeding."
In a statement released when the state bar filed its charges, Eastman said the complaint was "filled with distortions, half truths, and outright falsehoods."
The disbarment proceedings began in June and stretched on for more than 35 trial days, spread out over the course of five months, and involved 23 different witnesses and 700 exhibits. Eastman himself spent more than 12 hours on the stand. He insisted that his actions amounted to little more than "zealous advocacy" for his client, former President Trump, and that many of his alleged acts of misconduct were protected by the First Amendment. He defended his Jan. 6 speech, saying his point "was to raise concerns about illegality in the conduct of the election that may well have led to the certification of somebody who did not win the election.”
As for the two infamous memos, he said he never showed them to Trump, and said they were meant as internal documents offering up scenarios to be considered by Trump's legal team.
Judge Yvette Roland wrote that Eastman, in his memos, his speech at the Capitol, and in other writings and public appearances, had made knowingly false claims with an intent to deceive, and that he deliberately ignored certain pieces of evidence that cut against his legal theories.
"Eastman knew that there were no legitimate dual slates of electors in the seven contested states because the Trump electors lacked certification and could not be legally considered on January 6, 2021," Roland wrote. "Moreover, Eastman was aware that Vice President Pence lacked the authority to decide which slate of electors would be counted because his sole responsibility was simply to open the ballots. Yet, Eastman used the false assertion concerning dual slates of electors to provide an alternative strategy for Vice President Pence to declare President Trump as the winner of the 2020 presidential election."
"Eastman’s claims, in this proceeding, that he believed 'the slates were legitimate as a matter of historical precedent' are unbelievable and not supported by the record," she added.
Roland rejected that as a defense, writing: "Eastman’s inaccurate assertions were lies that cannot be justified as zealous advocacy."
Roland said that Eastman exhibited "gross negligence" by relying on certain pieces of evidence that were clearly false and could have been proven so with little effort.
"He never verified the accuracy of the information received from others; rather, he simply accepted it as valid," Roland wrote.
The judge found that Eastman's misconduct was aggravated by three factors: "multiple acts of wrongdoing, lack of candor and indifference."
Eastman is also facing criminal charges in Georgia, stemming from his alleged involvement in pressuring electors there to send an alternate slate to Washington, D.C. A handful of former Trump attorneys, including Sidney Powell, Kenneth Chesebro and Jenna Ellis have already pleaded guilty to criminal charges in the state. Three other lawyers who worked on court filings following the 2020 election are facing attorney discipline charges in Washington, D.C. Rudy Giuliani is facing both disbarment and bankruptcy.
Follow @hillelaron
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
