The senators argue that California’s discipline of Eastman reflects political pressure on lawyers representing an unpopular position. In their brief, they say that “an unpopular or even losing legal argument does not equal professional unfitness” and warn that punishing lawyers for legal judgments could discourage zealous advocacy.

Eastman was disbarred in California in April. The former law clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas was identified by then-special counsel Jack Smith as a co-conspirator in Trump’s alleged effort to remain in power after losing the election. Eastman also faced criminal charges in Georgia and Arizona over his role in the election-related scheme.

The dispute centers on the boundary between protected legal advocacy and professional misconduct. Cruz and Lee contend that a state should not discipline an attorney simply because regulators disagree with the attorney’s reasonable legal judgment. Their filing describes the bar disciplinary process as having been weaponized against lawyers on the “disfavored side of public controversies.”

Lee’s involvement carries added significance in the Senate: he is positioned to become the leading Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee next Congress. Records previously uncovered by the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack showed that Lee told Trump lawyer Cleta Mitchell that pursuing Jan. 6 as a strategy was dangerous, noting that courts and state legislatures had not supported Trump’s claims that he won the election.

The senators’ filing is part of a continuing political and legal debate over accountability for attempts to overturn the 2020 result, which culminated in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. In September, Smith testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee; Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri called for Smith to be disbarred as well.