Trump attorney John Eastman used to have licenses to practice law in California and Washington, D.C. Both of those have been suspended following a ruling by a California Bar Court judge that found him culpable of all ten disciplinary charges and recommended he be disbarred. Eastman is appealing that ruling, but in the meantime, a federal judge in the District of Columbia, where he is also licensed, forbade him from practicing law until the resolution of his appeal.
Here in Colorado, another federal judge forced Eastman to resign from a case while his license remains suspended. He is no longer lead counsel for the Colorado Republican Party in its lawsuit attempting to overturn Colorado’s open primary process, but remains involved in an advisory role.
Eastman, however, insists there is still one court where he is allowed to practice law: the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS). Despite multiple rulings and orders from judges across the country, Eastman claims that the highest court in the nation says he may continue to argue before the nine justices, despite not having an active law license in Washington, D.C.
In a May 6 appearance on the podcast of fellow election fraud conspiracist Joe Oltmann, Eastman insisted that the Supreme Court doesn’t care about the California Bar Court’s ruling.
“California’s unique- it has a Bar Court, all of whom are appointed by Democrats or the Democrat-controlled state Supreme Court,” says Eastman. “But the trial judge can only recommend disbarment. And then it goes to an intermediate appellate court called the Review Court, which was also all appointed by the Democrat-controlled state Supreme Court. And if the review court disagrees with the recommendation, it ends there. But if they agree with the recommendation, it goes on to the California Supreme Court, which is the only body that can actually disbar or suspend a license. The news media just kind of bolloxed that. But the fact of a recommendation for disbarment is to impose a temporary suspension of my license pending appeal. And that’s where we are now.
“And then last week, the District [of Columbia] where I also have a bar license, followed suit and issued a temporary suspension. And [the] central District of California have done the same thing. The Supreme Court has made clear, though, that the federal courts are not bound by state disciplinary proceedings. They have to conduct an independent review of the record, and we will be asking for that. And then the other thing is, the US Supreme Court has a similar rule, and on a temporary suspension they issue an order to show cause why they shouldn’t impose a suspension on you there as well. And the Supreme Court last week sent me a letter saying ‘thanks for the information. Keep us apprized.’ In other words, they’re not doing anything because they don’t consider what California did to be final that warrants their review at this point. And so I think that’s extremely important. And most of my cases, most of my work is before the U.S. Supreme Court. And so I’m still allowed to practice there and will continue to do so.”
States United Democracy Center, a nonpartisan national election integrity advocacy nonprofit, filed the initial complaints against Eastman with the bar associations in California and D.C.
Reached for comment via email, SUDC Senior Counsel Gillian Feiner offered the following statement:
“The Supreme Court rules call for lawyers to be suspended if they engaged in conduct unbecoming a member of the Supreme Court Bar or if any other court suspends them,” said Feiner. “These are criteria John Eastman clearly meets.”
The SCOTUS press office did not return an email inquiry seeking to confirm Eastman’s claims. This article will be updated with any response received.
Eastman did appear in a courtroom on Friday, albeit as a defendant. He pled not guilty to Arizona state charges of fraud, forgery, and conspiracy related to his efforts to keep Trump in power following the 2020 election. He also faces similar criminal charges in Georgia.
