Government

Trump Lawyer Jenna Ellis Declares Flawless Victory After Stipulation Of Misconduct In CO Bar Complaint

Mere "recklessness" isn't quite the flex she thinks it is.

By  
on
Jenna Ellis

Jenna Ellis (Photo by Jason Kempin/Getty Images)

Another member of Trump’s Elite Superfriends Sparklemagic Strike Team Task Force got dinged yesterday as the Supreme Court of Colorado approved an admission by attorney Jenna Ellis that she made false statements about the 2020 election in violation of both ABA and Colorado rules of professional conduct.

In the aftermath of Trump’s loss, Ellis became a familiar figure, trotting along behind Rudy Giuliani as he leaked, broke wind, and vomited nonsense in court about a stolen election. Although she never entered an appearance on Trump’s behalf, “Doctor” Ellis, a self-described constitutional law attorney  spewed a steady stream of lies about fraudulent and illegal ballots on television and social media, earning multiple bar complaints. As first reported by Colorado Newsline, these matters have now been resolved, with Ellis signing a Stipulation to Discipline admitting that she made ten “misrepresentations while serving as counsel for the Trump campaign and personal counsel to President Trump.”

Over and over, Ellis claimed to have evidence that Trump won “in a landslide.” In fact, the Trump campaign never produced any evidence of fraudulent ballots or election tampering, much less “over 500,000 votes [in Arizona] that were cast illegally.” She also admitted that she had misspoken when she claimed that “Hillary Clinton still has not conceded the 2016 election,” although not when she took to Twitter to accuse Republican pollster Frank Luntz of having a “micropenis.”

In an opinion approving the stipulation, Presiding Disciplinary Judge Bryon M. Large noted that “this matter presents unique facts, and [the court] is keenly aware that it does not have the benefit of factually analogous cases imposing discipline.” Which is a nice way of saying “congratulations, you have invented a new way to bring the profession into disrepute.”

And let’s quote this at some length, since Ellis continues to misrepresent her own conduct here:

The parties agree that Respondent made these statements, which violated Colo. RPC 8.4(c), with at least a reckless state of mind. The parties agree that Respondent was not counsel of record in any lawsuits challenging the 2020 election results. The parties agree that Respondent, through her conduct, undermined the American public’s confidence in the presidential election, violating her duty of candor to the public. Finally, the parties agree that two aggravators apply—Respondent had a selfish motive and she engaged in a pattern of misconduct—while one factor, her lack of prior discipline, mitigates her misconduct.

Sponsored

With a verbosity that only $8/month can buy, Ellis seems to be touting her own recklessness as to the veracity of her claims as a virtue.

And perhaps she really does believe that the court’s reprimand somehow vindicates her claims. If so, it wouldn’t be the first time the president’s erstwhile counsel benefitted from her own inability to comprehend basic written materials. Indeed, this is a person who once won an unemployment claim because the hearing officer determined that she was too incompetent to be fired for cause. From traffic court.

“The number of cases in which the claimant committed an irreparable, egregious act was not significant compared to the total number of cases she processed,” wrote the Colorado Labor and Employment official, noting that, while she “failed to meet the employer’s expectations 100 percent of the time,” Ellis “did the best she could with her education and training to meet the expectations of the employer.”

And that appears to be about the nicest thing anyone ever said about Ellis’s job performance. But never fear, she’ll land on her feet — the wingnut gravy train leaves no loyal grifter behind.

Sponsored

Office of Attorney Regulatory Counsel Public Statement

Elizabeth Dye lives in Baltimore where she writes about law and politics and appears on the Opening Arguments podcast.

Topics

, ,