Eastman Disputes Facts Underpinning Charges in State Bar Trial

John Eastman defended his actions as one of Donald Trump’s post-election attorneys, arguing Tuesday the disciplinary charges that could cost him his law license are based on inaccurate accusations and that the California State Bar ignored the facts when charging him with ethical and legal violations.

The conservative law professor disputed the State Bar’s allegations that Vice President Mike Pence “publicly rejected” in a letter to the Senate the memos Eastman wrote outlining the possible actions Pence as president of the Senate could take if two different slates of presidential electors from the states were presented to Congress on Jan. 6, 2021.

The bar’s charges “are incorrect,” Eastman said, testifying by video at the Los Angeles trial due to unspecified out of town business “It attributes the language and in Vice President’s ‘Dear Colleague’ letter as referring to me. It doesn’t. And it refers to the advice that he just simply reject the electoral votes, and that was not the request that I had made,” Eastman said.

“On both of those scores this is an inaccurate attempt to try and link it to me,” he told State Bar Court Judge Yvette Roland.

Eastman also disagreed with bar charges that he “knew or was grossly negligent in not knowing” the historical record didn’t support the argument the vice president could delay counting of electoral votes at the joint session of Congress.

When the drafters of the Constitution created the electoral college, he said, “there’s no discussion whatsoever about the role of the vice president but there is discussion about the role of Congress. And they clearly, clearly, took the step of excluding Congress from any decision-making role in the choice of the president,” he said.

The one-time Chapman University law dean earlier testified that he didn’t know until Pence’s counsel Gregory F. Jacob testified that the vice president already decided to send the letter rejecting Eastman’s arguments.

Eastman faces 11 counts of violating ethics rules and state law regulating lawyer conduct as well as moral turpitude related to memos he wrote to Trump campaign officials, statements made in court filings, media appearances, and a published article about the election, and for remarks ahead of the storming of the Capitol.

Separately, he was one of 19 people—including former President Donald Trump—charged by Fulton County, Ga., prosecutor Fani Willis of plotting to overturn the 2020 presidential election results in that state. Four defendants have entered guilty pleas in the case including Trump lawyer Jenna Ellis earlier Tuesday.

Eastman, charged there with nine counts, including urging a public official to violate their oath, conspiracy to impersonate a public officer, forgery, and filing false documents, has pleaded not guilty.

Final Witness

The last defense witness for the case in chief, Eastman contends he’s being penalized for taking unpopular positions on behalf of Trump. Eastman argues election irregularities cost Trump the White House.

On Monday, Eastman said his intent as to all of his work on Trump’s behalf “was always to identify problems with the conduct of election and to try to investigate them and identify whether the problems and illegality may have affected the outcome of the election so that the actual will of the voters when all legal votes were cast was what decided the election, not illegality and illegal votes.”

The state bar has rested its case against Eastman. The hearing resumes Oct. 30 when the defense will finish its direct examination of Eastman and the bar prosecutors begin their cross examination. Closing arguments are scheduled for Nov. 3, with the court giving the parties until Nov. 22 to file post-trial briefs.

The case will be considered submitted then, with Roland having 90 days to issue a decision. The judge can recommend disbarment, suspension, or some other form of discipline if any. Her order can be appealed to the State Bar Court Hearing Department. The final decision on Eastman’s law license rests with the California Supreme Court, which oversees attorney discipline and admission.

A federal judge in California last year held that Eastman and Trump “more likely than not” committed criminal conduct and the Jan. 6 congressional committee referred Eastman to the Department of Justice.

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

The case is In Re Eastman, Cal. State Bar, No. SBC-23-O-30029, hearing 10/24/23.