Posted on 07/24/2026 9:09:24 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Shortly after our personal representation of President Trump in his impeachment acquittal before the U.S. Senate, we warned about what we saw coming. The Left was preparing to go after conservative lawyers. Now that unfortunately has come to pass, and it’s exactly what the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) is preparing to challenge at the U.S. Supreme Court.
The ACLJ is representing Professor John Eastman, a former Trump attorney, in a forthcoming cert petition to the Supreme Court of the United States challenging his disbarment by the state of California.
In the wake of the 2020 election, Professor Eastman, a constitutional scholar and former Chapman University law school dean, represented President Trump in a number of election-related challenges involving issues of first impression upon which no court had weighed in. He was thereafter disbarred by the California Bar following disciplinary proceedings arising from his legal advice, public advocacy, court filings, and speeches regarding the 2020 presidential election. That decision was erroneously upheld by the California Supreme Court.
No court sanctioned Professor Eastman for any of his legal positions, yet the California Bar disbarred him anyway. In essence, Professor Eastman was disbarred for exercising his free speech rights and providing legal counsel to President Trump in the aftermath of the election.
If a state can disbar a conservative attorney for his advocacy—his free speech—by retroactively labeling that advocacy as professional misconduct, then the Left will be empowered to wage lawfare against every conservative attorney with whom they disagree.
The question that we will now bring before the Supreme Court is whether the First Amendment prohibits the government from imposing professional discipline on an attorney for advancing legal arguments on disputed constitutional questions, regardless of how those arguments are ultimately received by a court.
Our legal system depends on lawyers who are willing to advocate for their clients, test the boundaries of existing law, and present arguments that courts may ultimately accept or reject. Throughout our nation’s history, many legal theories that were initially dismissed eventually became accepted constitutional doctrine. Constitutional law develops through advocacy, disagreement, and judicial decision-making—not through governmental punishment of attorneys because their legal positions prove controversial or unpopular.
That principle is especially important when the underlying issues involve core political speech and constitutional debate. The First Amendment exists to protect robust discussion on matters of public concern, including questions about the meaning and application of the Constitution itself.
The Supreme Court has long recognized that attorneys do not surrender their constitutional rights by virtue of their profession.
Yet Professor Eastman was disbarred even though no court had sanctioned him for the advocacy at issue or found that he had engaged in sanctionable litigation misconduct. To punish an attorney for exploring novel legal theories and pursuing every potentially meritorious argument on behalf of a client—simply because others disagree with the advice given or the legal positions advanced—is a dangerous indictment of our legal system.
The implications extend far beyond Professor Eastman. Every attorney who represents a controversial client, advances a novel constitutional theory, or challenges prevailing legal orthodoxy has an interest in ensuring that professional discipline is not used to chill protected advocacy. Today’s unpopular argument may become tomorrow’s accepted precedent. The Constitution protects the freedom to make those arguments in the first place.
If conservative lawyers lose their free speech rights, our constitutional system of law is doomed. We’re fighting to make sure that doesn’t happen.
For decades, the ACLJ has defended the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment before the Supreme Court of the United States. We are proud to represent Professor Eastman as we ask the Court to address these important constitutional questions and to reaffirm the vital role that free speech and vigorous legal advocacy play in our constitutional system.
Our petition is due on September 11, and we look forward to presenting these important First Amendment issues to the Court.
Take action with the ACLJ. Sign the petition: Stop the Left From Disbarring Conservatives.
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
The left has shown us their true colors and we should believe them.
A whopping 1% of cert petitions make it to the USSC docket.
John Adams represented the accused soldiers for the Boston Massacre. Everyone deserves representation.
Hooray for ACLJ & Jay Sekulow.
Looks like a sure winner in the appropriate court.
AMEN!!
One of the lessons we should learn from leftists is to use our positions, no matter how neutral, important or seemingly unimportant, to advance our cause, which is saving this country. It doesn’t matter if you’re a lawyer, a politician, the office janitor, an electrician or a clerk in a small town government. Use your position in any small way you can to fight. The other side is already doing it.
If Eastman loses the court system and the idea of fair lawyers is just crap.
“Law School Dean Disbarred for Defending Trump: ACLJ Takes the Fight to the Supreme Court”
Interesting that the lawyers who defended Charles Manson never had to worry about disbarment.
(for the record, I oppose ANY lawyer being disbarred for doing the job of defending ‘unpopular’ clients)
This case screams that it should be one of the 1%.
I was going to mention that, and Adams did a great job.
State bar associations (lawyers unions) should have ZERO official industry authority.
The bar is a private organization.
And it’s run by leftists.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.