Quantcast
Tuesday, March 21, 2023
- Advertisement -

Trump Torches DOJ Claim that Dem. U.S. Reps Can Sue Him for J6 Injuries

'The D.C. Courts should rule in favor of President Trump in short order and dismiss these frivolous lawsuits... '

(Mark Pellin, Headline USA) Donald Trump issued a scathing repudiation of the Justice Department’s claim that nearly a dozen Democrat House members and two police officers can sue the former president for physical and psychological injuries they allegedly received during the Jan. 6, 2021, protests at the U.S. Capitol.

In a legal brief filed Thursday, the DOJ advised a federal appeals court that it should allow lawsuits to proceed that are looking to sue Trump for the actions of alleged J6 rioters, and dismiss the former president’s argument for immunity.

Trump’s spokesman said that not only does presidential immunity extend in this case, but also that the former president actively tried to prevent any injuries from occurring.

“President Trump’s speech and statements on January 6, 2021, repeatedly called for peace, patriotism, and respect for our men and women of law enforcement,” read a post on Truth Social.

“President Trump authorized up to 20,000 National Guard troops to ensure peace and safety on January 6, 2021, only to have that offer rejected by Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Washington, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser. The D.C. Courts should rule in favor of President Trump in short order and dismiss these frivolous lawsuits.”

The Justice Department’s filing acknowledged the former president’s right to speak “to the public on matters of public concern,” but argued “It does not include incitement of imminent private violence,” according to the Washington Post.

“Presidents may at times use strong rhetoric. And some who hear that rhetoric may overreact, or even respond with violence,” the DOJ wrote. But its attorneys advised the court to consider legal precedent from a 1969 Ku Klux Klan-linked case ruling that speech “directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action” or “likely to incite or produce such action” is not protected by the First Amendment.

In its filing, the DOJ said they weren’t arguing that any of the allegations that Trump triggered the J6 uprising were true, “only that the ‘plausibly allege[d]’ claims describe conduct outside the scope of a president’s official duties,” the Post reported.

Trump’s attorneys argued that the former president’s words didn’t come close to inciting violence and that “in the run-up to January 6th and on the day itself, [Trump] was acting well within the scope of ordinary presidential action when he engaged in open discussion and debate about the integrity of the 2020 election.”

“The actions of rioters do not strip President Trump of immunity,” his lawyers wrote in their court filings.

The former president’s spokesman echoed those sentiments, and drew historical precedents for extra measure.

“The Department of Justice has rightfully agreed that presidential immunity is broad and absolute,” the spokesman wrote. “If it were not, Joe Biden would be personally liable for the disasters in Afghanistan, our Southern Border, record drug use causing massive destruction of families and lives, and many other terrible crises that he has caused. Additionally, other Presidents throughout history would be held responsible for catastrophes they potentially may not be responsible for. All witch hunts and hoaxes have to end!”

Copyright 2023. No part of this site may be reproduced in whole or in part in any manner without the permission of the copyright owner. To inquire about licensing content, use the contact form at https://headlineusa.com/advertising.
- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -

TRENDING NOW

- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -