Capitol Police Can Continue Lawsuit Against Trump for Jan. 6 Insurrection
WASHINGTON — A group of U.S. Capitol Police officers are moving ahead this week in suing former President Donald Trump after winning a court judgment Friday that says he has no immunity from civil lawsuits.
The police officers accuse Trump of negligence by inciting the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection that injured some of them as the then-outgoing president’s supporters stormed the building.
Trump’s attorneys argue he should be granted the absolute immunity the Constitution gives presidents for carrying out their official duties. The former president says he was speaking on an issue of public concern to the crowd that later invaded the Capitol.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit disagreed, saying starting an insurrection is not authorized under the Constitution as an official act of the presidency.
“‘Whether [Trump’s] actions involved speech on matters of public concern bears no inherent connection to the essential distinction between official and unofficial acts,'” the unanimous decision of the three-judge panel says.
They described the police officers’ claims as “indistinguishable” from a different lawsuit filed by U.S. House Democrats against Trump over the Jan. 6 riot in which the same appellate court ruled last month the former president could be held liable.
The more recent lawsuit was filed by seven Capitol Police officers who said Trump’s “unlawful actions” resulted in them being assaulted during the riot.
They are suing some of his supporters in the same lawsuit. They include former Trump campaign strategist Roger Stone and right wing activist groups Stop the Steal and the Proud Boys.
In addition to lawsuits, Trump was indicted Aug. 1 on four criminal charges associated with his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
The Capitol Police officers are represented by the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, which said in a statement, “Similar to our lawsuit, the indictment alleges that Trump conspired to overturn the 2020 election by deliberately spreading false election fraud claims and inciting violence against members of Congress and the law enforcement officers whose job was to protect them, all in violation of federal civil rights law.”
The appellate court ruling against Trump Friday continues the same reasoning used by the U.S. District Court early last year.
Referring to Trump’s call for his supporters to march to the Capitol, the U.S. District Court decision said that rather than being part of his official duties, the president’s words were “an implicit call for imminent violence or lawlessness” not protected by presidential immunity or First Amendment free speech rights.
The appellate court agreed, saying, “When a first-term president opts to seek a second term, his campaign to win reelection is not an official presidential act.”
The next presidential immunity court battle is Jan. 9, when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is set to hear arguments on whether Trump is immune from criminal charges for trying to overturn the 2020 election.
On Saturday, Special Counsel Jack Smith filed a brief arguing no provision of the Constitution shields a president from criminal responsibility.
Trump has said a president’s “absolute immunity” is found in the separation of powers described in the Constitution, meaning the judicial branch cannot rule over the executive branch of government.
Smith’s brief said the immunity does not extend to crimes, “including, most critically here, illegal acts to remain in power despite losing an election.”
Trump has pleaded not guilty to the charges against him, such as defrauding the United States, obstructing Congress and violating the civil rights of voters through schemes to overturn the election victory of Joe Biden.
He faces four criminal prosecutions, two of them related to his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Nevertheless, he remains the frontrunner for the next presidential election.
The U.S. Supreme Court has denied Trump’s request to rule on his immunity from liability. The justices instead said the lower courts should decide.
You can reach us at [email protected] and follow us on Facebook and Twitter
We're proud to make our journalism accessible to everyone, but producing high-quality journalism comes at a cost. That's why we need your help. By making a contribution today, you'll be supporting TWN and ensuring that we can keep providing our journalism for free to the public.
Donate now and help us continue to publish TWN’s distinctive journalism. Thank you for your support!
