Trump Election Attorneys Staring At Coming Wave Of Ethics Complaints

A lot of lawyers pushed the Big Lie of the 2020 election, but will the profession do anything about it?

cartoon trumpIf you were a lawyer part of the effort to overturn the results of a free and fair election, facing an ethics complaint isn’t “naked political intimidation,” it’s just the natural and logical consequences of your actions. Those are just the facts my friend.

Axios has compiled a story on the efforts of The 65 Project, a PAC marshaling its resources to file bar complaints against the 100+ lawyers that filed lawsuits to overturn the results of the 2020 election or otherwise undermine the vote. But honestly, it has some trash takes built in — like the headline, “High-powered group targets Trump lawyers’ livelihoods.” Um, excuse me, but that seems to miss the real point. These attorneys tried to subvert the rule of law — the very thing they’re sworn to uphold. If you don’t want to do that, perhaps lawyering is not right for you. (And let’s not forget that all of the cases attempting to overturn the 2020 election were thrown out of court, no matter the political affiliation of the judges overseeing the matter.)

But The 65 Project’s (named after the number of lawsuits that sought to overturn the 2020 election) effort to hold folks accountable for spreading and maintaining the “Big Lie” of the 2020 election is certainly interesting. The project was created by Democratic consultant Melissa Moss, and according to advisor David Brock, founder of Media Matters for America and American Bridge 21st Century, the goal is to “not only bring the grievances in the bar complaints, but shame them and make them toxic in their communities and in their firms.”

The organization is looking at some 111 lawyers that were involved to some extent in trying to overturn or undermine the presidential election including Trump advisors, those who signed on to be “alternate electors,” and any attorney that participated in the January 6th insurrection. The 65 Project is also planning on spending $2.5 million in its first year to advertise in battleground states to deter others from taking on these kinds of bogus legal challenges. And, towards that end, is pushing for bar associations to adopt model rules that “fraudulent and malicious lawsuits to overturn legitimate election results violate the ethical duties lawyers must abide by.”

The 65 Project’s advisory board counts some heavy hitters in its ranks: Former Utah Supreme Court Chief Justice Christine Durham, former president of the American Bar Association Roberta Ramo, former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, and even a conservative — former Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy at the Department of Homeland Security during the Bush administration and FedSoc member Paul Rosenzweig.

But not everyone is thrilled with these efforts. Like, for example, Paul Davis. The attorney who got fired after filming himself at the January 6th attempted coup. He also made himself the butt of many a joke after filing a briefing (ultimately unsuccessful) attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election by CITING HOBBIT LAW. So yeah, that grain of salt best be pretty damn big before reading this:

“This move is nothing more than a desperate attempt by leftist hacks and mercenaries…” Paul Davis, a Texas attorney targeted for his presence at the Capitol on January 6, wrote in an email to Axios.

He described an effort “…to neutralize anyone on the right with the ability to stand in the way of the left’s efforts to hide malfeasance in the 2020 elections and to clear the path for a repeat of similar malfeasance in the 2022 mid-terms.”

Sponsored

Another attorney that is OUTRAGED (lolz) over potentially feeling the consequences of her own actions is former Biglaw partner Cleta Mitchell. She left Foley & Lardner after it became public that she participated in a now infamous phone call where Donald Trump was captured on tape pressuring Georgia election officials to commit what election law experts identified as well within the statutory definition of election fraud. Her comments to Axios show how little she understands the point:

“I’m betting Marc Elias isn’t on the list,” she said in a text message, linking to a story about the Democratic attorney’s challenge to the results of a House race in Iowa last year and one about his claims of voting machine “irregularities” in another in New York.

“Ok for Dem lawyers to file election challenges. Of course.”

(The challenge Mitchell refers to is an Iowa congressional race where the GOP candidate won by a mere 6 votes. The matter was withdrawn by the Dem candidate. And if you don’t understand the difference between that and what Cleta Mitchell did, I’m guessing the whole “distinguishing cases” part of law school didn’t go too well for you.)

And John Eastman, of the Coups 4 Dummies memo fame, who is already facing bar complaints (and more), had this to say:

He “expects the Bar’s investigation into these matters will fully exonerate him from any charges,” his attorney said in an emailed statement.
“As was his duty as an attorney, Dr. Eastman zealously represented his client, comprehensively exploring legal and constitutional means to advance his client’s interests.”

Sponsored

Listen, those targeted will try to dress this up in whatever way they can to take attention off themselves. But ultimately, as Rosenzweig said, it is about the rule of law, “With great power comes great responsibility. Lawyers have a special role in and special obligation to society. It is all the worse, then, when they use their special position to attack the foundations of the rule of law.”

And if you don’t want bar associations getting wind of your efforts to undermine the rule of law, maybe… don’t undermine the rule of law.


Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).