In re Jordan

Summary

The court upheld the disciplinary panel's findings that Jordan repeatedly made frivolous and unsupported accusations against federal judges, knowingly violated court rules and orders, impugned judicial integrity, and prejudiced the administration of justice. It rejected his First Amendment, petition, due process, equal protection, and evidentiary challenges, concluding that lawyers have significantly limited speech protections in court filings and that the record established the violations by clear and convincing evidence. The court disbarred Jordan from practicing law in Kansas and denied his motion to compel production of disciplinary-hearing recordings.