Trump doesn’t have presidential immunity from lawsuits over January 6

StmarysCity79

Well-Known Member
More bad news for the traitor and domestic terrorist Donald Trump


Former President Donald Trump isn’t immune from being held accountable in civil lawsuits related to the January 6, 2021, US Capitol riot in a long-awaited, consequential decision from the federal appeals court in Washington, DC.

The decision, making new law around the presidency, will have significant implications for several cases against Trump in the Washington, DC, federal court related to the 2020 election. The decision arises out of lawsuits brought by Capitol Police officers and Democrats in Congress.

The opinion, written by Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan, states that not everything a president does while in office is protected from liability.



The president “does not spend every minute of every day exercising official responsibilities,” the opinion said. “And when he acts outside the functions of his office, he does not continue to enjoy immunity. … When he acts in an unofficial, private capacity, he is subject to civil suits like any private citizen.”

The decision to allow the January 6 lawsuits against Trump to proceed was unanimous among the three judges on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge Greg Katsas concurred with the decision, and Judge Judith Rogers concurred in part.

The decision allows three lawsuits against Trump from Capitol police officers and members of Congress who are seeking recovery from emotional distress and physical injury from the attack to move forward. The complaints largely rely on a federal law prohibiting individuals from conspiring to prevent someone from holding federal office.

 

gemma_rae

Well-Known Member
Nancy Pelosi Reaction GIF by GIPHY News
 

OccamsRazor

Well-Known Member
Cool! So, when members of Congress make stock market deals based on insider information (the actual purchase or sales of the stocks are done "acting outside the functions of their office" then they "do not continue to enjoy immunity.")
Can't wait for the lawsuits to start rolling in :yahoo:
 

StmarysCity79

Well-Known Member
Cool! So, when members of Congress make stock market deals based on insider information (the actual purchase or sales of the stocks are done "acting outside the functions of their office" then they "do not continue to enjoy immunity.")
Can't wait for the lawsuits to start rolling in :yahoo:


Great. I would very much like that too.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
The panel ruled on an appeal lodged by President Trump after U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta, appointed under President Obama, ruled in 2022 that President Trump was not protected by presidential immunity for his speech on Jan. 6.

“To deny a president immunity from civil damages is no small step,” Judge Mehta wrote at the time. “The court well understands the gravity of its decision. But the alleged facts of this case are without precedent, and the court believes that its decision is consistent with the purposes behind such immunity.”

The ruling is not final, Judge Srinivasan emphasized.

The rejection of President Trump's appeal "is necessarily tied to the need to assume the truth of the plaintiffs’ factual allegations at this point in the proceedings," he wrote. "President Trump has not had a chance to counter those allegations with facts of his own. When these cases move forward in the district court, he must be afforded the opportunity to develop his own facts on the immunity question if he desires to show that he took the actions alleged in the complaints in his official capacity as President rather than in his unofficial capacity as a candidate. At the appropriate time, he can move for summary judgment on his claim of official-act immunity."

The Dec. 1 decision "is not necessarily even the final word on the issue of presidential immunity," he added, so "we of course express no view on the ultimate merits of the claims against President Trump."


 
Top