Attorney John Murrin appeals the district court’s 1 order effectively reinstating an earlier court order suspending him from practicing law in the District of Minnesota. Upon careful review, we con- *509 elude that Murrin’s constitutional arguments are without merit, and we find no abuse of discretion. See In re Hoare, 155 F.3d 937, 940 (8th Cir. 1998) (disciplinary orders are reviewed for abuse of discretion; district court’s authority to suspend attorney is inherent power derived from attorney’s role as officer of court). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.