Read the Town and Country feature. While I'm dubious about the financial shenanigans that got him disbarred, and it seems they are addressed only in passing, if

Read the Town and Country feature. While I'm dubious about the financial shenanigans that got him disbarred, and it seems they are addressed only in passing, if it's true that he's being kept disbarred purely for having fought this case, unlike anyone else who would be in this situation, then that's a disgusting travesty. The American compact is that people are innocent until proven guilty, and that all criminals get defence lawyers. It is because you cannot trust the justice system to accuse only innocent men; the state cannot be allowed the power to point at a person and send him to jail for life. It would be one thing to use your right of free association to avoid this man in one's day to day life, and eminently defensible, but for him to be subject to systematic retaliation that destroys his career for doing a good job defending someone controversial and unpopular? That's not really something I want the state bar association to do. The justice system is already over-incentivized to over-prosecute, over-convict and run roughshod over defendant's rights whenever it can. If they can find an excuse to deprive you of a job for defending OJ, they can find a similar one for (say) defending someone from Black Lives Matter in a court in Alabama.