John Eastman seeks postponement of disbarment proceedings as potential indictment looms: report

John Eastman, the attorney who is awaiting potential indictment for his alleged role in leading Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election, has sought the postponement of disbarment proceedings that are ongoing against him, Politico reports.

Eastman, who is identified as “co-conspirator 2” in the Jan. 6 election conspiracy case against Donald Trump, cited his ongoing legal issues in his request through attorneys to a California judge in an Aug. 4 filing.

Eastman’s attorneys Randall Miller and Zachary Mayer wrote in the filing that, “[R]ecent developments in the investigation have renewed and intensified [Eastman’s] concerns that the federal government might bring charges against him.”

Eastman’s attorneys in the court filing note that potential criminal charges could compel Eastman to assert his Fifth Amendment privilege, which would imperil his ability to defend himself in the disbarment proceeding.

“[Eastman] requests that the Court exercise its discretion to stay the State Bar’s disciplinary proceeding against him pending resolution of a parallel criminal investigation being conducted by Special Counsel Jack Smith and any trial or other proceedings that may result from that investigation,” Eastman’s attorneys wrote.

Eastman is facing charges on multiple allegations of professional and legal violations in connection with his role in trying to overturn the 2020 election, according to the report.

The proceeding started in June but was postponed until late August after running longer than anticipated.

Eastman now wants the proceeding to be postponed until after Smith’s most recent case against Trump is resolved, the report said.

“The indictment heightens the potential for [Eastman] to be charged as a criminal defendant,” Miller and Mayer wrote.

“When there are parallel criminal and civil proceedings, the defendant faces the difficult choice of asserting his Fifth Amendment right at the risk of losing a non-criminal trial (here, a disciplinary proceeding), or waiving his constitutional right against self-incrimination. Courts have recognized the need to stay civil proceedings to avoid prejudicing the defendant’s rights.”

Read the full article here.