WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court has disbarred conservative attorney Larry Elliot Klayman from practicing before the nation’s highest court following a series of disciplinary actions in Washington, D.C., Florida and Pennsylvania involving professional misconduct.
The disbarment order followed a June 8 suspension and an order directing Klayman to explain why he should not be disbarred. Although Klayman responded, the court proceeded with disbarment.
The decision prohibits Klayman from practicing law before the U.S. Supreme Court but does not automatically revoke his law license nationwide. His eligibility to practice in other jurisdictions remains subject to their respective disciplinary rules and decisions.
Klayman founded Judicial Watch in 1994, establishing the conservative nonprofit organization known for filing lawsuits and investigating alleged government corruption and misconduct. He served as its chairman and general counsel until leaving the organization in 2003.
After his departure, Klayman established Freedom Watch in 2004, another organization focused on government accountability, according to Freedom Watch USA.
Klayman’s departure from Judicial Watch was followed by years of litigation and disputes with the organization.
According to Florida Bar disciplinary records, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld a jury verdict in 2021 ordering Klayman to pay Judicial Watch $2.3 million.
Klayman’s representation of three former Judicial Watch employees who sued the organization also became the subject of disciplinary proceedings.
According to a 2020 District of Columbia Court of Appeals decision, Klayman represented the individuals in litigation against Judicial Watch without obtaining the organization’s informed consent, creating conflicts of interest involving a former client.
In June 2020, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals suspended Klayman from practicing law for 90 days.
Another disciplinary case arose from Klayman’s representation of former client Elham Sataki in a sexual harassment lawsuit.
According to a Florida Bar referee’s report, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals imposed an 18-month suspension in 2022 following findings of professional misconduct involving confidential client information.
The disciplinary proceedings also addressed Klayman’s efforts to continue participating in Sataki’s litigation after she terminated his representation.
On Aug. 7, 2025, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals imposed another 18-month suspension stemming from Klayman’s attempt to represent Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy.
The disciplinary case involved misleading statements Klayman made about his prior disciplinary history while seeking permission to represent Bundy in federal court.
Klayman challenged the disciplinary findings, arguing that the proceedings were unfair and that judicial bias against his political views influenced the outcome.
According to Florida Bar disciplinary filings, Klayman alleged that a judge was politically biased against him.
The court rejected his arguments, finding insufficient evidence that the disciplinary proceedings were motivated by his political beliefs.
The 18-month suspension remained in effect, with Klayman required to demonstrate his fitness to practice law before reinstatement.
The disciplinary consequences extended beyond the District of Columbia.
On Nov. 6, 2025, the Florida Supreme Court suspended Klayman from practicing law in Florida for two years, according to its published decision.
The Florida proceedings involved reciprocal discipline arising from Klayman’s earlier suspensions in the District of Columbia.
Klayman challenged the Florida disciplinary action, arguing that the proceedings were untimely and that Florida should not be bound by the District of Columbia suspension orders.
The Florida Supreme Court rejected those arguments and imposed the two-year suspension.
Pennsylvania subsequently imposed its own disciplinary sanctions.
According to a March 24, 2026, Pennsylvania Supreme Court order, the court suspended Klayman from practicing law in Pennsylvania for 18 months based on the 2025 District of Columbia disciplinary action involving his attempted representation of Bundy.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court stated that Klayman had failed to respond to a notice directing him to explain why reciprocal discipline should not be imposed.
Klayman has also pursued litigation against District of Columbia bar officials and journalist Josh Gerstein over allegations related to his disciplinary proceedings.
According to a December 2023 judgment from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Klayman alleged that bar officials and Gerstein had conspired to defame him in connection with proceedings concerning his fitness to practice law.
Klayman argued that bar officials should not be immune from legal liability and that he should be permitted to pursue additional evidence supporting his claims.
The appeals court rejected his arguments, finding that the officials were protected from liability for statements made in the course of their disciplinary responsibilities.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s disbarment order adds another sanction to Klayman’s disciplinary record following proceedings in multiple jurisdictions.
Although the order bars him from practicing before the U.S. Supreme Court, his eligibility to practice law elsewhere remains governed by the disciplinary decisions and reinstatement requirements of the jurisdictions in which he is admitted.
To comment please go to one of these social media platforms:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DavisVanguard
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/peoples-vanguard-of-davis-inc/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/davisvanguard/
X: https://x.com/davisvanguard
Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/vanguardnewsgroup.bsky.social
Subscribe to the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
