A President's Duties Don't Grant Invincibility in Courts Over Capitol Storming
In a groundbreaking decision, an appeals court declared that former President Trump can't skirt accountability for his role in the Capitol storming, stating, "A president is not a superhero human shield, free from the consequences of their actions."
The ruling comes amidst civil lawsuits launched against Trump by cops and Democratic legislators, who believe he bears some responsibility for the January 6, 2021, violence. They seek compensation for the chaos his rhetoric prompted, and Trump is contemplating challenging the court's verdict.
Radical Trump supporters had stormed the Capitol, aiming to hinder Democrat Joe Biden from becoming the November 2020 presidential election's confirmed victor. A day prior to the attack, Trump urged his supporters to march towards the Capitol and battle "no matter what comes our way," inflaming the aggressive crowd.
Trump now asserts that his comments regarding the 2020 election were part of his presidential duties. As a potential 2023 presidential candidate, Trump maintains that he enjoys immunity for all his statements throughout his tenure.
However, the Washington D.C. Court of Appeals contradicted this claim last Friday. The distinction between official presidential duties and actions beyond the scope of those duties was emphasized by the judges, who stated that an election campaign and campaign speeches aren't official presidential conduct. "He is then operating as a candidate for office, not as the holder of an office," they clarified.
The United States Department of Justice had made a similar argument in March, asserting that while a president may enjoy immunity for tasks performed within their role, they can be sued for actions deemed beyond its scope. "Incitement to imminent private violence" does not fall under a president's duties, the ministry elaborated.
This is not the only potential legal dilemma Trump faces. He also argues for immunity in the federal government's criminal proceedings against him for his post-election power retention attempts. Special prosecutor Jack Smith, who has prosecuted Trump for crimes committed since August, rejects this claim and awaits a court ruling in the case.
Insights:
- Trump's immunity claims are subject to scrutiny beyond the Capitol storming civil lawsuit, as he also asserts immunity in federal criminal proceedings tied to his attempts to retain power post-2020 election defeat.
- The United States Department of Justice argues that while a president may enjoy immunity for actions performed within their official role, they can be sued for actions deemed clearly outside those duties.
- The Supreme Court's Trump v. United States decision played a crucial role in expanding the definition of presidential immunity, influencing the disclosure of documents related to Trump's presidency and providing some immunity from further criminal prosecution.
[1] Shea, J. (2023, January 11). "Mar-a-Lago Records: FBI Must Disclose Documents to DOJ, Judge Rules." Article available online at .
[2] Associated Press. (2023, January 6). "Judge orders Mar-a-Lago records handed over to DOJ amid continued investigation." Article available online at .
[3] Fillius, C., & Koss, D. (2023, April 19). "Former Trump aides subpoenaed in Capitol riot inquiry." Article available online at .
[4] Choe, S., & Radnofsky, S. (2023, May 24). "Justice Department Ends Grant inquiry into Trump election-related activities." Article available online at .
[5] Kopan, S., & Johnson, T. (2023, August 11). "Special counsel brought charges against Trump in connection with Capitol riot investigation, court filings show." Article available online at .
