Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Federal appeals court considers TFG's plea to grant him immunity from Capitol riot lawsuits
https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/07/politics/trump-immunity-lawsuits-appeal-january-6Donald Trump’s legal team will be back in court Wednesday morning to try to convince a federal appeals court that the former president should be immune from liability in three separate lawsuits stemming from the January 6, 2021, insurrection.
A federal judge in Washington, DC, ruled in February that the lawsuits can move forward, denying Trump’s claim that his conduct was shielded by the privileges of the presidency, and now Trump’s attorneys are appealing that decision.
“The underlying question here is simple: is a president immune from civil liability when he or she gives a speech on a matter of public concern? The answer is undoubtedly, yes,” Trump’s attorneys said in court papers. They argued Trump’s remarks at the center of the case – the speech he gave to supporters at the Ellipse prior to the attack – is protected by his “ironclad presidential immunity as it relates to speechmaking.”
The three lawsuits were filed last year by Democratic members of the House and police officers who defended the US Capitol on January 6, with the suits claiming Trump prompted his supporters to attack.
In his ruling earlier this year, DC District Court Judge Amit Mehta wrote that Trump’s statements to his supporters before the riot “is the essence of civil conspiracy” because Trump spoke about himself and rallygoers working “towards a common goal” of fighting and walking down Pennsylvania Ave.
“To deny a President immunity from civil damages is no small step. The court well understands the gravity of its decision. But the alleged facts of this case are without precedent,” Mehta wrote.
A federal judge in Washington, DC, ruled in February that the lawsuits can move forward, denying Trump’s claim that his conduct was shielded by the privileges of the presidency, and now Trump’s attorneys are appealing that decision.
“The underlying question here is simple: is a president immune from civil liability when he or she gives a speech on a matter of public concern? The answer is undoubtedly, yes,” Trump’s attorneys said in court papers. They argued Trump’s remarks at the center of the case – the speech he gave to supporters at the Ellipse prior to the attack – is protected by his “ironclad presidential immunity as it relates to speechmaking.”
The three lawsuits were filed last year by Democratic members of the House and police officers who defended the US Capitol on January 6, with the suits claiming Trump prompted his supporters to attack.
In his ruling earlier this year, DC District Court Judge Amit Mehta wrote that Trump’s statements to his supporters before the riot “is the essence of civil conspiracy” because Trump spoke about himself and rallygoers working “towards a common goal” of fighting and walking down Pennsylvania Ave.
“To deny a President immunity from civil damages is no small step. The court well understands the gravity of its decision. But the alleged facts of this case are without precedent,” Mehta wrote.
10 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
