Republican Senators Mike Lee and Ted Cruz, alongside conservative legal advocacy groups and former Trump lawyers, are urging the U.S. Supreme Court to review the California Supreme Court's April 2026 disbarment of attorney John Eastman. Supporters argue the disbarment represents the political weaponization of state bar discipline for legal advice surrounding the 2020 presidential election. The Supreme Court is set to consider Eastman's petition at its November 6, 2026 conference.
Eastman Supreme Court disbarment appeal
- ▪Former attorney John Eastman filed a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the California Supreme Court's April 2026 revocation of his state law license.
- ▪The U.S. Supreme Court scheduled a November 6, 2026 conference to consider whether to review John Eastman's appeal of his California disbarment.
- ▪In September 2026, John Eastman moved to represent University of Pennsylvania law professor Amy Wax in the Third Circuit federal appeals court despite his California disbarment.
Republican senator support briefs
- ▪Senators Mike Lee and Ted Cruz argued in their Supreme Court brief that existing malpractice law and judicial sanctions sufficiently protect clients without requiring professional disbarment for losing arguments.
- ▪Legal organizations America First Legal Foundation and Spero Law represented Senators Mike Lee and Ted Cruz in filing their Supreme Court amicus brief supporting John Eastman.
- ▪U.S. Senators Mike Lee and Ted Cruz filed an amicus brief on October 14, 2026, requesting that the U.S. Supreme Court hear John Eastman's disbarment appeal.
Political weaponization claims
- ▪The America First Policy Institute stated in an amicus brief that state bar discipline against political opponents threatens attorney independence and public trust in the judiciary.
- ▪Seventeen current and former attorneys for Donald Trump, including Sidney Powell and Ed Martin, filed an amicus brief alleging conservative lawyers face systematic political barfare.
- ▪Senators Mike Lee and Ted Cruz asserted in their Supreme Court filing that John Eastman's California disbarment resulted from the political weaponization of the bar disciplinary process.
Eastman 2020 election role
- ▪Special Counsel Jack Smith identified John Eastman as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 2023 federal election subversion indictment against Donald Trump.
- ▪A California state bar court concluded in 2024 that John Eastman engaged in deceit and dishonesty while pushing unfounded legal theories to disrupt the January 6, 2021 electoral count.
First Amendment arguments
- ▪The Heritage Foundation's Oversight Project argued in an October 13, 2026 Supreme Court brief that California improperly treated strict scrutiny standards as optional for John Eastman's political legal advice.
- ▪Senators Mike Lee and Ted Cruz contended that politically driven attorney discipline creates a chilling effect that hinders clients from finding willing, independent legal counsel.
Federal jurisdiction questions
- ▪The Heritage Foundation's Oversight Project argued that California lacked authority to disbar John Eastman because legal representation involving presidential election certification concerns strictly federal constitutional matters.
- ▪Former Justice Department official Jeff Clark signed onto the Oversight Project's amicus brief asserting state tribunals cannot override U.S. Supreme Court First Amendment precedents.
Story comments
Loading comments…