In a shocking revelation, it was learned that the California Bar Association disbarred attorney John Eastman, whose supposed crime was giving legal advice to President Trump after the 2020 election.
We saw New York State do the same to Rudy Giuliani for giving the president advice. Note that neither gentleman was ever convicted of a crime.
They rendered opinions that many believed were actually quite accurate. But even if their opinions were wrong, we are getting into some dangerous territory when we start prosecuting or disbarring lawyers for giving advice.
In the aftermath of the 2020 election, a number of Republicans raised serious issues regarding alleged irregularities within the electoral process. While many claimed these allegations were false and were all struck down by courts, the fact is that there were a number of lawsuits that did result in judicial rulings confirming that some state actors implemented policies that were unlawful.
One was a case in Michigan, where it was determined the secretary of state illegally decreed that signatures on mail-in ballots were to be presumed valid.
Another was a decision that the state officials in Wisconsin illegally allowed for dropboxes to be placed in various locations.
In any event, Eastman informed Trump that, on a number of occasions in the past, presidential candidates challenged the electoral outcome in various states in a very legitimate fashion.
The first was in the election of 1876 when Rutherford B. Hayes disputed the results in various states, alleging fraud. The challenge led to the Great Compromise of 1876, giving the election to Hayes, despite the fact Samuel B Tilden won the popular vote.
Then, in 1960, John Kennedy questioned the results from the state of Hawaii, sending his own electors to cast votes for him to preserve his rights at the Electoral College as the results were being challenged.
Being keenly aware of these past challenges, Eastman advised Trump in 2020 that he, too, had a legal right to initiate court challenges to the results in a number of state tallies and send forth his own electors to preserve his rights at the electoral college.
There was nothing outrageous or illegal about this advice.
It is irrelevant whether Trump failed or succeeded in the subsequent trials. It was neither illegal nor unethical to advise Trump that he had the same rights to seek alternative electors, as did anyone in the last election.
Disbarring Eastman because the leaders of the Bar disagree with his political advocacy is appalling, inconsistent and dangerous.