DOJ asks judge to dismiss lawsuit against Barr and Trump for infamous clearing of Lafayette Square

[JohnSJ]

"Lawyers for the Justice Department urged a federal judge on Friday to dismiss lawsuits against former president Donald Trump, former attorney general William P. Barr and other officials for last June's violent clearing of demonstrators from Lafayette Square by U.S. military and police," The Washington Post reported.

"Trump and other U.S. officials are immune from civil lawsuits over police actions taken to protect a president and to secure his movements, government lawyers said of the actions taken ahead of a photo op of Trump holding a Bible in front of the historic St. John's Church. A crowd of more than 1,000 largely peaceful demonstrators were protesting the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis before the park was cleared," the newspaper explained. "A year to the week after Floyd's death, Justice Department lawyers argued that the lawsuits should also be tossed because last November's presidential election made future violations unlikely. The government said the square has been reopened, and President Biden's administration does not share Trump's stated hostility toward Floyd and the racial justice movement."

......

"The American Civil Liberties Union of D.C., Black Lives Matter, other civil liberties groups and individual protesters accuse Trump and senior officials of driving the June 1 events. Military, federal and local police forcibly cleared the square using batons, clubs, horses, pepper spray, smoke and fired projectiles 30 minutes before a citywide curfew began. Images of violence drew a national backlash against Trump's calls for "overwhelming force" to put down those he called 'THUGS' and domestic terrorists. The nation's top military official later apologized for walking with Trump before television cameras that day," The Post reported.

If the judge agrees with Biden's DOJ, it could result in a dangerous precedent.

"Lawyers for the ACLU said that despite legal precedents, the government's defense would 'authorize brutality with impunity" in the heart of Washington at one of the most symbolic spaces within the seat of the federal government,' the newspaper noted. "If their defense was upheld, U.S. authorities 'could have used live ammunition to clear the park, and nobody would have a claim against that as an assault on their constitutional rights,' said Scott Michelman, legal director for ACLU-D.C."

https://www.rawstory.com/lafayette-square-trump-barr/

[orangecrush]

1. What the absolute f@ck

Is going on in this new justice department?!??

[JohnSJ]

2. This is why I don't think anything will happen with trump.

Last edited Sat May 29, 2021, 09:42 AM - Edit history (1)

[uponit7771]

9. +1

[brush]

3. Whose side is Garland on? This doesn't look good at all. Guess we can forget about...

him appointing a special prosecutor for Jan. 6 now that the republicans put down the commission.

Joe had a lot of choices for AG. Did he make a mistake with this guy? We need a strong AG, what with all the killer cops and winger militias on the loose in society.

[orangecrush]

4. Looks like it's time

For Garland to go already.

There is no justifying this

Damn, that was quick.

[GoodRaisin]

13. There's a reason Obama chose him.

He was considered someone the Republicans would accept. Perhaps they should have.

[Amishman]

15. He is a moderate, but that not what is in play here.

He is a strong supporter of Federal power. Given the profile and circumstances of this case, it could make it to the supreme court. Once there, I could see an 'odd couple' 5-4 led by Gorsuch limiting the use of force to break up protests.

Garland is in an awkward position where defending federal power means defending Trump

[Takket]

5. this is one of the most infamous events of government oppressing our Constitutional rights in

modern American history

it was a travesty they weren't arrested the day it happened, but they want the lawsuit dismissed??? WHY?????????

"President Biden's administration does not share Trump's stated hostility toward Floyd and the racial justice movement"

What the HELL does that have to do with ANYTHING??? The lawsuit is against drumpf/Barr, not Biden! If drumpf shoots someone on 5th avenue is the DOJ going to say "oh, forget it, Biden isn't going to shoot anyone, so we can ignore this." WTF??????????????

[JohnSJ]

6. I don't think Biden will fire the AG

[mahina]

7. Yeah, that's upsetting.

Ugh

[dem4decades]

8. Isn't that twice this week the DOJ acted as if Barr was still the AG?

People vote for Democrats fo change from the last administration, they'll stop voting if the don't get change.

[Caliman73]

10. I don't think it is about Barr. It is about precedent.

Going after the DOJ for one act that, in my opinion, is rightfully considered an illegal abuse of power, could open up Pandora's Box for future right wing lead DOJs to go after less unambiguous uses of government power, say to go after right wing terrorists by Democratic AGs. Power does not like to hold other power accountable, lest someone come along and try to hold them accountable in good faith or bad.

[uponit7771]

11. Not understanding how ending this lawsuit is going to stop or end stupid wingers from going after

... Biden DOJ when they do their jobs under the law.

Nothing "influences" dumb asses who video themselves committing felonies and people who cover them doing it.

[Caliman73]

12. I totally agree. Didn't say I agree, but I do think that is the motive.

The frustration is that Democratic DOJ's are concerned about things like precedent, seeming unbiased and non partisan, and respecting traditions. Republicans only care about power.

It is not a good thing, but like I said. I think that it isn't specifically about Barr.

[no_hypocrisy]

14. What confounds me is that until there is a case prosecuted against Trump,

any sitting President, the myth of Absolute Immunity will continue. A President could literally break the law, any law, while in office. I'm certain The Framers of the Constitution did not intend for that branch of government to be a cesspool of corruption.

Sure, maybe the court would dismiss the charge(s) without Garland, but there would be a record for future challenges.

[Fullduplexxx]

16. It's all a big club