Former Trump attorney John Eastman is asking the US Supreme Court to restore his California law license, arguing that the disciplinary action against him punished constitutionally protected legal advocacy.
In a petition filed with the Supreme Court, Eastman contends that his efforts surrounding the 2020 presidential election were protected by the First Amendment. He also claims that the disciplinary proceedings were politically motivated and that other attorneys involved in attempts to challenge the election results were not subjected to similar punishment.
Eastman was disbarred in California after facing disciplinary proceedings over his role in efforts to overturn Donald Trump’s defeat in the 2020 election. He is now asking the nation’s highest court to intervene, an unusual step because attorney discipline is generally handled by state courts.
His Supreme Court petition argues that state authorities can punish genuine professional misconduct, but cannot characterize protected legal advocacy as misconduct simply to impose discipline. Eastman is represented in the case by Jay Sekulow, who previously served as a lawyer for Trump.
The dispute stems from Eastman’s prominent role in Trump’s post-election legal strategy. A former Chapman University law professor, he represented Trump in a Supreme Court case that sought to invalidate votes in four states. The lawsuit relied on Trump’s allegations of widespread fraud in the election.
Eastman also prepared legal memoranda proposing that then-Vice President Mike Pence could reject electoral votes from several battleground states when Congress met to certify the results. Pence rejected that interpretation, maintaining that the Constitution did not give him such authority.
Eastman later repeated his election-related claims at a rally near the White House on January 6, 2021. The gathering preceded the attack on the US Capitol, which interrupted Congress’ certification of Joe Biden’s victory.
California disciplinary authorities had recommended that Eastman be disbarred after concluding that his efforts to block Biden’s victory were unlawful and lacked factual or legal support. His license was suspended while he challenged the decision.
The State Bar Court’s appellate division later concluded that Eastman had violated professional ethics rules concerning misleading courts and false public statements. California’s highest court subsequently declined to review his case.
Eastman had maintained during the state proceedings that his free-speech and due-process rights were violated and argued that he had been unfairly singled out for punishment.
