Trump can be held civilly liable in Jan. 6 riot, judges rule
Source: Washington Post
The unanimous decision by a federal appeals court in Washington is expected to be appealed and also offers insight into how the court could view Trumps argument that presidential immunity also protects him from being charged criminally for his efforts to stay in power after the 2020 election.
Two U.S. Capitol police officers and about a dozen Democratic lawmakers sued Trump in 2021, saying he potentially instigated violence on Jan. 6 by telling supporters the election was stolen and urging them to march to the Capitol and fight like hell. The plaintiffs sued under a roughly 150-year-old law that bars the use of force, threats or intimidation to prevent government officials from carrying out their duties and allows anyone injured by such actions to collect damages. They argued Trump violated the statute designed to combat Ku Klux Klan violence after the Civil War by conspiring with members of far-right groups to keep lawmakers from confirming Joe Bidens election win.
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/12/01/trump-can-be-sued-jan-6-immunity/?location=alert

Lunabell
(7,309 posts)if Ashli Babbitt's mom filed a wrongful death lawsuit? I would love to see that!
I hope the rest of the injured and those who suffered PTSD file lawsuits. Talk about trickle down economics, lol. Someone isn't going to be a billionaire anymore.
JoseBalow
(7,411 posts)
PTSD I would have it even if I rightfully defended nyself.
JoseBalow
(7,411 posts)duhneece
(4,350 posts)Easily, both the family of Ashli B AND the Law Enforcement who shot her experienced loss...and the LE who shot her could easily have suffered PTSD.
nitpicked
(1,136 posts)Said that this will likely be appealed.
Delphinus
(12,220 posts)That's his modus operandi.
WhiteTara
(30,722 posts)He damaged me personally; along with every other citizen of this nation.
Ponietz
(3,637 posts)Marthe48
(20,597 posts)I hope, I hope, I hope!
FakeNoose
(37,289 posts)
riversedge
(75,420 posts)Link to tweet
?s=20
..................Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images
"In arguing that he is entitled to official-act immunity in the cases before us, President Trump does not dispute that he engaged in his alleged actions up to and on January 6 in his capacity as a candidate," they write. "But he thinks that does not matter. Rather, in his view, a Presidents speech on matters of public concern is invariably an official function, and he was engaged in that function when he spoke at the January 6 rally and in the leadup to that day. We cannot accept that rationale."
The court notes, however, that their ruling does not prevent Trump from attempting to raise claims of immunity as the civil lawsuits move forward. Instead, they say that at this stage where Trump has not yet taken a position on the factual allegations leveled against him in each lawsuit, they are rejecting his blanket attempt to claim every action was taken based on his role as the president.
The ruling is related solely to the civil lawsuits that were brought against Trump in the wake of the Jan. 6 attack, and not special counsel Jack Smith's federal criminal case that is set for trial in March.
...
republianmushroom
(19,809 posts)Question, why did it take so long for them to come to this decision ?
sop
(14,099 posts)I suspect Trump won't be on the hook for damages, the taxpayers will.
edhopper
(35,900 posts)he doesn't have blanket protection. He was not acting as President at this rally. It was more a campaign event. So it's not part of the Government.
DallasNE
(7,776 posts)This should be the model for 14th Amendment arguments against Trump being eligible to again hold office as President. It gets around the technicalities on standing, etc. and goes straight to the merits.
Bayard
(24,957 posts)"Were you screwed over by donald trump? You may have a legal claim. Call this toll free number now!"
rubbersole
(9,777 posts)demigoddess
(6,675 posts)that is the way I see it.