A federal appeals court on Friday rejected former President Donald Trump’s efforts to dismiss several civil lawsuits finding him guilty of the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the Capitol, quashing Trump’s argument that being president made him “immune” from liability, at least for now, and potentially damaging his defense in his criminal cases related to the 2020 election.
Trump faces three civil lawsuits filed through Democratic members of Congress and the Capitol Police, seeking to punish him for inciting the Jan. 6 riot.
After a federal district judge refused to throw out the cases in the lower court in February 2022, Trump appealed them to the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which heard arguments in the case last year, arguing he cannot be punished for Jan. 6 because his actions in the aftermath of the election are shielded by “presidential immunity” and his actions are legally protected because he was acting as president at the time.
On Friday, the court opposed that argument and upheld the lower court’s ruling opposing Trump’s efforts to “dismiss claims opposing him on the grounds of presidential immunity. “
The justices noted in the 3-0 ruling that they were ruling against Trump “at this level of the proceeding” and that the former president would still have one more chance to present his case, but they invalidated Trump’s claims that he enjoyed presidential immunity. Because he sought to reverse the 2020 election while he was president, even though his moves were as a political candidate and not as part of his official presidential duties.
Trump’s crusade activities, such as the attempt to overturn the election results, which the plaintiffs say incited the Jan. 6 riot, were conducted “in a private, unofficial capacity as a task seeker, not in an official capacity as a workplace owner. “The court ruled, adding that “actions taken in an unofficial capacity are not eligible to obtain immunity from official acts. “
Trump’s spokesman, Steven Cheung, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
“In [Trump’s] view, a President’s speech on matters of public concern is invariably an official function, and he was engaged in that function when he spoke at the January 6 rally and in the leadup to that day,” Judge Sri Srinivasan, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, wrote in their opinion for the court. “We cannot accept that rationale.”
Civil lawsuits against Trump are still pending in district court, and the appeals court noted Friday that the former president will still have “the opportunity to demonstrate that his alleged movements before and on January 6 were taken in his official capacity as a preaspect. ” and not “Our ruling does not necessarily constitute the final word on the question of pre-aspect immunity,” the court noted, emphasizing that it was also not ruling on the merits of Trump’s duty by January 6. Most likely, Trump also can simply appeal the court’s ruling to the Supreme Court. The ruling barring Trump’s pre-aspect immunity will also come into play as he faces two criminal cases in Georgia and in federal court for attempting to overturn In the 2020 election, he also sought to have charges against him will be dropped due to pre-aspect immunity in those cases that are still ongoing: judges might be less likely to side with him given the court’s decision.
The cases at stake in Friday’s ruling include litigation filed by Rep. Eric Swalwell (R-Calif. ), a separate lawsuit filed by more than 10 House Democrats and a third lawsuit filed by two U. S. Police officials. Capitol. (Other police lawsuits against the president are making their way through the courts. ) The lawsuits seek to hold Trump and his allies accountable for the trauma that the events of January 6 caused members of Congress and officials at the Capitol. construction at the time of the attack, as well as how it interfered with lawmakers’ efforts to certify the result of the presidential election. Trump helped incite the Jan. 6 attack based on his efforts to overturn the presidential election, the plaintiffs say, adding through statements he made at the rally that preceded the riot, such as telling his supporters to “fight like hell. ” and that they could “follow very different rules” to challenge the vote count. In his ruling allowing the lawsuit against Trump, U. S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Trump’s immunity claims were “legally misleading and erroneous. ” The Democratic-appointed court is judging claims dismissed in the lawsuit against attorneys Rudy Giuliani and Donald Trump Jr. , ruling that their speeches at the Jan. 6 rally were protected by the First Amendment.
Attempt to hold Trump accountable for Jan. 6 violence stalled in appeals court (Politico)
Judge Allows Jan. 6 Lawsuit Against Trump to Move Forward, but Dismisses Lawsuit Against Giuliani and Don Jr. (Forbes)
Trump claims immunity in Jan. 6 trial because his efforts to overturn the election were part of his presidential duties (Forbes)
Another Capitol Police Officer Sues Trump Over January 6 Insurrection (Forbes)
Nadler and nine Democratic congressmen join the lawsuit against Trump, Giuliani and Proud Boys for the attack on the Capitol (Forbes)
Ex-House Impeachment Manager Eric Swalwell Sues Trump And Allies Over Capitol Riot (Forbes)
Two Capitol Hill officials sue Trump for incitement and complicity in Jan. 6 insurrection (Forbes)