Kenneth J. Chesebro, once a Harvard-trained legal mind working on high-profile political cases, is now permanently barred from practicing law in New York. His role in orchestrating the “alternate electors” scheme after the 2020 presidential election, culminating in a felony conviction for conspiracy to file false documents became a cautionary tale of how political ambition can collide with the ethical duties of a lawyer. This disbarment not only ends Chesebro’s legal career but also sends a powerful message: the law will not shield those who undermine the democratic process.
Matter of Chesebro, 2025 NY Slip Op 03855 (App. Div. 3d Department, June 26, 2025).
Kenneth J. Chesebro, a Harvard-trained attorney admitted in New York and other states, was a key legal architect of the Trump campaign’s “alternate electors” plan after the 2020 election. He drafted memos and a false Georgia “Certificate of Votes” asserting Trump had won, despite the certified results showing Joe Biden as the victor.
In October 2023, Chesebro pleaded guilty in Georgia to conspiracy to file false documents admitting he helped create and facilitate fraudulent elector certificates intended to be submitted to government authorities. The New York Attorney Grievance Committee deemed this a “serious crime” under state law and began disciplinary proceedings.
Following an interim suspension in October 2024, a formal hearing, and review of aggravating factors including his failure to report the conviction to bar authorities the New York Appellate Division (Third Department) ruled on June 26, 2025, to permanently disbar him. The court found his conduct “undercuts the very notion of our constitutional democracy” and “strikes at the heart of the administration of justice.”
Chesebro is now barred from practicing law in New York and faces reciprocal or pending discipline in other states, including California, Texas, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Florida.
Significance: This case underscores that lawyers who knowingly engage in dishonest, illegal conduct particularly acts undermining democratic institutions can face the profession’s most severe sanction. It joins other high-profile post-2020 election discipline cases and reaffirms that an attorney’s duty to uphold the law outweighs political loyalty.
More broadly, this case highlights public accountability: attorneys sworn to uphold the Constitution were found to be subverting it. The Third Department’s emphatic language that Chesebro’s conduct “undercuts the very notion of our constitutional democracy” reflects the judiciary’s view that lawyers owe a duty not just to clients, but to the rule of law and democratic process. This disbarment thus represents a reaffirmation that legal ethics includes a safeguard for democratic norms, and it may influence future standards (for example, prompting calls for explicit duties regarding election integrity).
Want more legal ethics breakdown like this?
Subscribe to our blog or follow us for weekly case summaries, rule analyses, and disciplinary updates.