Clinton-Linked Attorney Connected to Steele Dossier Gets Sanctioned By Texas Court

Share the Story :

The former attorney for the Hillary Clinton campaign just got a smackdown from a federal court and has been sanctioned.

Marc Elias, who currently heads the Perkins Coie political law firm was former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s campaign attorney, and the man who hired Fusion GPS, famous for the Steele Dossier, on behalf of the campaign, The Washington Examiner reported.

A top Democratic election lawyer was smacked with sanctions by Texas federal appeals judges for a “redundant and misleading submission” and for violating his ethical “duty of candor” to the court in a case in which the Democratic Party was fighting against a state law that banned straight-ticket voting.

Marc Elias, a lawyer for Perkins Coie who is well known for his election fights during the 2020 contest and for hiring the opposition research firm Fusion GPS, which hired British ex-spy Christopher Steele in 2016, was criticized and punished by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit on Thursday, along with a number of his colleagues.

Judge Edith Clement, nominated by former President George W. Bush in 2001, and Judge Jennifer Elrod, nominated by Bush in 2007, both ordered Elias and his associates to be sanctioned, while Judge Catharina Haynes, another 2007 Bush nominee, did not.

“Appellees did not notify the court that their latest motion to supplement the record filed on February 10, 2021, was nearly identical to the motion to supplement the record filed several months ago by the same attorneys, on September 29, 2020. Critically, Appellees likewise failed to notify the court that their previous and nearly identical motion was denied,” the judges said in their decision.

“This inexplicable failure to disclose the earlier denial of their motion violated their duty of candor to the court,” the judges added.

They were ordered to pay attorney’s fees and double costs. They were also advised to review the section of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct on “Candor Toward the Tribunal.”

The judges said that the attorneys pushed a “redundant and misleading submission” and “there is no legal basis to support Appellees’ post hoc contention that motions to supplement the record applies only to one stage of an appeal.”

Ellias and his team were behind near all of the 2020 election lawsuits that came from the left.

“If Appellees had any confusion about the application of the order, they could have and should have disclosed the previously denied motion in their new motion. Moreover, after Appellant notified Appellees that they intended to file a motion for sanctions based on this lack of candor and violation of local rules, Appellees could have withdrawn their motion. But they did not,” the judges ruled. “Instead, they stood by a motion that multiplied the proceedings unreasonably and vexatiously. Sanctions are warranted in this case to deter future violations.”

“The Secretary’s request for sanctions — based entirely on Plaintiffs’ motion to supplement the record in response to a standing argument advanced by the Secretary for the first time on appeal — is both extreme in its reach and entirely groundless,” the Democratic attorneys argued in February.

But the judges took the side of the state of Texas.

“Elias has no valid explanation for the misleading submissions to the Fifth Circuit. Even when they were notified that they violated ethical rules, they refused to withdraw their motion. They were aware of their violations and blatantly chose to ignore them,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who represented Hughes, said.

“I thank the Court for issuing these much-needed sanctions. Perkins Coie cannot continue to mislead the Court, especially in a matter as important as election integrity,” he added.


Share the Story :

Add Comment