Judge to Rule ‘Shortly’ on Eastman’s Bid to Delay License Trial

Attorney John Eastman, indicted in Georgia over his connection to former President Donald Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election, awaits a judge’s ruling in his bid to postpone his California disciplinary trial while the criminal case advances.

State Bar Court Judge Yvette D. Roland Thursday took under advisement Eastman’s request to abate or stay proceedings pending resolution of an ongoing federal criminal investigation, as well as any trial which may result, into related conduct. The trial is scheduled to resume Aug. 22, with the possibility of arguments continuing into September.

Roland, after the nearly three-hour hearing Thursday, said she would rule shortly on the request to stay that matter.

The defense seeks a stay “until Dr. Eastman can be out of harm’s way,” with respect to the Georgia grand jury or indictment, his attorney Randall A. Miller said, adding, “it’s our position he can’t respond to anything further given the existence of the Georgia criminal proceedings.”

Roland told the parties she would “definitely proceed in a constitutionally appropriate way” and “for that reason would hold off on the abatement motion today.” Roland is considering whether some form of partial stay is appropriate. “I am not at this point considering a total abatement of the action.”

‘Grave’ Situation

Bar prosecutors opposed Aug. 10 Eastman’s postponement request, calling it “nothing more than an opportunistic attempt to delay the decision in respondent’s State Bar case, as his situation with regard to potential criminal charges is the same today as when the trial started.”

“There’s no longer an argument that it is speculative or unknown whether there would actually be criminal prosecution. It’s here.” Miller said. “The situation now is more grave. We’re not just talking about Dr. Eastman’s license to practice law but we’re talking about his freedom.”

Trump was indicted in the District of Columbia on Aug. 1 on federal charges over his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. A Georgia state grand jury on Aug. 14 indicted Trump, Eastman, and 17 others on racketeering and other charges in connection with efforts to allegedly pressure election officials there to change the results. Trump is facing other charges in Florida for the handling of classified documents and in New York related to alleged hush money paid to an adult film star ahead of the 2016 election.

Eastman’s request to stay the disciplinary case came before the announcement of the Georgia indictment charging him with nine counts, including urging a public official to violate their oath, conspiracy to impersonate a public officer, forgery, and filing false documents.

The California State Bar in January charged Eastman with 11 ethical and statutory obligations in his role to help Trump undermine the 2020 presidential election results that culminated in the Jan. 6 raid on the US Capitol. The one-time Chapman University law dean wrote memos, later widely discredited, advancing theories that then-Vice President Mike Pence could declare Trump the victor or delay Congress’ certification of the results.

Fifth Amendment

Eastman contends he can assert the Fifth Amendment privilege to prevent testifying.

“The Fifth Amendment attached at Monday night at 8 p.m. when that indictment was released, and at that point in time was when Dr. Eastman can say ‘I can speak no longer or whatever I do here in California is going to be used against me’” in Georgia, Miller said.

An attorney in California can’t assert a blanket Fifth Amendment privilege in a bar matter, Roland said, but must make that as to a specific question.

Deputy Trial Counsel Duncan Carling said the Jan. 6 committee referred Eastman to criminal charges related to the alleged conspiracy with Trump “in December of 2022 prior to the filing of the notice of disciplinary charges.”

A California federal judge held in October 2022 that Eastman and Trump “more likely than not” committed criminal conduct related to the events preceding Jan. 6.

“I understand there are complexities now but I don’t think it is believable that it didn’t occur to respondent at the start of trial that he might be indicted,” Carling said.

Miller also noted that out-of-state witnesses who had agreed to testify for Eastman are now refusing to do so because they are “terrified” what they say will be used against them. “We’ve got people who won’t appear on his behalf in this case and I can’t do anything about it,” he told the court.

Roland asked the bar to reschedule witnesses to testify on Aug. 22 when Eastman was scheduled to testify and to allow for the court to consider the case. “So everyone, I will see you next week,” she said.

The Office of Chief Trial Counsel represents the bar. Miller Law Associates represents Eastman.

The case is In re Eastman, Cal. State Bar, No. SBC-23-O-30029, hearing 8/17/23.