Rep. David Eastman vs. Uniparty: Fighting for America’s Constitutional Soul

In a recent and striking development within the Alaska Legislature, Rep. David Eastman faced significant political backlash for his unwavering commitment to the Constitution. The House voted overwhelmingly (39-1) to remove him from the House Judiciary Committee. This decision, far from reflecting on Eastman’s competence or dedication, instead highlights a troubling trend in political discourse where adherence to constitutional principles can become a liability rather than a virtue. It’s a symptom of a deeper malaise afflicting our political system, and reflects a national trend where constitutional adherence is often sacrificed at the altar of political agendas.

Eastman’s removal comes in the wake of his insistence on a joint session to address Governor Mike Dunleavy’s veto on a part of the education budget. His stance, grounded firmly in the constitutional mandate, diverged from the preferences of many of his so called “Republican colleagues”. This divergence has resulted in a stark consequence: being stripped of his sole committee assignment.

This move against Eastman is not just about one man or one committee assignment. It speaks volumes about the current state of political affairs, where constitutional adherence can be overshadowed by political maneuvering and globalists’ agendas.

The Unyielding Stance of Rep. David Eastman

David Eastman’s insistence on a joint session to vote on Governor Dunleavy’s education budget veto, grounded in the Alaska Constitution, exemplifies a commitment to the rule of law that should be the hallmark of every legislator. His principled stand, reminiscent of the values championed by the Founding Fathers of the United States of America, highlights the importance of steadfast adherence to legal and constitutional frameworks.

Advertisement: Rep. David Eastman's legal victory isn't just his win—it's a win for all who cherish liberty. But this triumph comes at a cost, a hefty $250,000. This lawsuit represents more than a personal attack; it's a battle against our fundamental freedoms. The limit of $249.99 per donor makes your contribution not just a donation, but a bold statement. Stand with David in this critical moment. Your support, as little as 0.68 cents a day, is not merely financial aid; it's a rallying call for those who stand for justice and constitutional rights. Show your support now.

The constitution of any state is its legal backbone, providing the framework within which laws are made and governance is conducted. Rep. Eastman’s advocacy for constitutional processes, especially in the context of significant budgetary decisions, is crucial. It is a reminder of the principles echoed by our Founding Fathers, who emphasized the importance of living and governing by steadfast principles, even though they rarely agreed together on public policy.

This is Constitutional Neglect

The vote against Rep. Eastman reveals a troubling aspect of modern political dynamics. It’s a clear indication that constitutional fidelity can be inconvenient for those who prefer the murky waters of political maneuvering over the clear streams of principled action. This neglect of constitutional mandates in favor of political expediency is a dangerous path, one that can lead to the erosion of public trust in our institutions.

The actions taken against Rep. Eastman should concern every American who values the rule of law and the principles of a democratic society. It’s a stark reminder that the defense of constitutional principles is often a solitary journey, fraught with challenges. However, it’s a journey that must be undertaken if we are to preserve the integrity of our political system.


  1. What precipitated Rep. Eastman’s removal from the Judiciary Committee?
    • His unwavering insistence on a constitutionally mandated joint session for voting on the governor’s veto led to his removal.
  2. Why is constitutional adherence crucial in legislative processes?
    • Adherence to the constitution ensures that legislative actions are based on law and principle, rather than personal or political gain.
  3. How can the public influence such political situations?
    • By actively engaging with their elected representatives and advocating for adherence to constitutional principles, citizens can influence political decisions.

In this era of political upheaval, the role of the public in holding their representatives accountable has never been more critical. The case of Rep. Eastman underscores the need for an engaged and informed electorate, vigilant against the encroachments of political convenience on constitutional sanctity.

“I am committed to pay any price and bear any burden to be able to advocate on behalf of the interests of my constituents. If you want to leverage my staff or my committee assignments to get me to do something that my constituents do not want, is not in their best interests, my answer is no, every time.”

Rep. David Eastman

Citizens need to rise to the occasion and support lawmakers like Rep. Eastman, who prioritize constitutional values over party politics. It’s essential to engage in the political process, voice support for constitutional adherence, and demand accountability from elected officials.

Pam Goode v. The Swamp in Juneau: A Betrayal of Conservative Values
Recently this year, a vote by Rep. Jamie Allard cost Rep. Eastman his staff.

The case of Rep. Eastman is a stark reminder of the challenges facing our democratic institutions. It highlights the importance of steadfast adherence to constitutional principles, even in the face of political adversity. Let us remember Romans 13:1 – “Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established.” This verse not only reminds us of the importance of respecting our governing structures but also underscores the responsibility of those structures to adhere to their foundational laws.

The story of Rep. Eastman should serve as a catalyst for a broader discussion on the role of constitutional principles in guiding our political processes. It’s a call to remain vigilant and proactive in ensuring that our democratic institutions uphold the highest standards of constitutional fidelity.

Scroll to Top