The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday denied a petition for appeal brought by former Chapman University law school dean John Eastman in his lawsuit against the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6 unrest. The lawsuit sought to block the committee from obtaining Eastman’s emails left on the university’s server.
U.S. District Judge David O. Carter overruled Eastman’s attorney-client privilege as former President Donald Trump’s attorney, as he invoked the “crime-fraud exception.”
Last year, Eastman appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals regarding 10 emails that he argued should remain private under attorney-client privilege.
In his petition to the Supreme Court, Eastman argued that Carter’s ruling “created a stigma for himself and his client, the former president of the United States and current candidate for the presidency.”
Eastman’s attorney, Anthony Caso, expressed disappointment in an email, stating, “We acknowledge that the Supreme Court is not a court of mere error correction. However, we believe the Ninth Circuit erred in refusing to vacate the erroneous district court decision, which is a clear violation of the Munsingwear doctrine.”
When Carter denied Eastman’s request for a hold on the ruling pending appeal, Eastman asked the Ninth Circuit to intervene. Eastman claimed that during this time, he provided a link to the documents to the Jan. 6 committee and requested that they not be viewed until his appeal was concluded.
“Defendants ignored Eastman’s request and distributed the emails to members of the committee,” Eastman argued. “Furthermore, they publicly filed the link to the confidential documents, which were downloaded by reporters following the case, thus rendering Eastman’s appeal moot. The Ninth Circuit subsequently denied Eastman’s motion to vacate Carter’s judgment.”
In his appeal to the Supreme Court, Eastman sought a review of the Ninth Circuit’s denial to vacate the district court judgment, which became moot due to actions taken by the congressional defendants’ counsel.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas recused himself from the case, as Eastman had once clerked for Thomas.
In his appeal to the high court, Eastman emphasized the exceptional importance of the case. He argued that the District Court’s crime-fraud holding, when viewed in the context of numerous privileged communications, was “clearly erroneous” and had negative implications for both himself and his former client, the former president of the United States and candidate for the office of president in 2024.
Eastman added, “The political and legal ramifications of such a holding are significant, and Eastman should not have to endure these ongoing ramifications when his right to appeal was deprived by the government’s unilateral actions, which mooted the appeal.”
Eastman is currently facing charges in a racketeering case in Georgia related to attempts to overturn the 2020 election of President Joe Biden. He is also facing disbarment hearings in California.
Denial of responsibility! Vigour Times is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
