Does Donald Trump, as former president, have legal immunity?
This is one of the questions Judge Amit Mehta of the Washington D.C. District Court will rule on, through the hearing that began Monday.
The background is a civil lawsuit against the former president and several elected representatives. The allegations relate to their roles in the storming of the Congress building on January 6, 2021.
Trump was acquitted in the Supreme Court case against him, where he was indicted for inciting the attack on Congress. This time, the result may be different, but it presupposes that the judge believes that the former president not have such immunity, explains Civita adviser and US expert, Eirik Løkke.
Has “evaporated”
“This is the first major test of whether a civil lawsuit, which is outside the political process, is a way to hold Trump accountable for the attack on Congress,” he explains.
– Does not stand above the law
As a rule, a president has immunity from civil matters, as long as this person holds the office.
– The attack happened while Trump was still president, but it is not the case that a president is above the law or has immunity for absolutely all matters, Løkke says.
Expert: – Afraid of losing
If the judge concludes that Trump has immunity, it will be less interesting if he has de facto committed illegal acts, he believes.
– This hearing is simply the basis for what kind of legal responsibility Trump may have.
– Be quiet
During today’s hearing, the judge repeatedly asked one question:
Why did he say nothing?
view more
–
As the crowds entered the congress building, the then president sat completely still in the boat.
“It was a nearly two-hour window where the president did not say, ‘Stop, get out of Congress, this is not what I want you to do,'” Judge Mehta said. CNN.
– What should I do with the fact that the president did not immediately condemn this behavior (…) and sent a tweet that one can argue that things got worse? Could it not mean that the president may have agreed with how the protesters behaved inside the congress building that day, she asked.
Unexpected gesture: – Surprised
Trump’s lawyer, Jesse Binnall, tells the channel that he believes that absolutely everything Trump did while he was president is covered by the immunity he had.
He also believes that Trump called on the protesters to act “peacefully and patriotically”.
– So you think I should ignore what he said in its entirety, the judge asked.
The short answer to Binnall was “yes”, as he believes that the role of president gives immunity when it comes to all statements, writes NBC.
– Pretty safe
The Civita adviser says he will be surprised if the judge believes that Trump has no legal responsibility for the accusations leveled against him.
This does not necessarily mean that Trump is guilty, Løkke emphasizes, but will in principle mean that a president can also be held responsible for his actions in a trial – if the evidence is strong enough.
– It should be said that the political responsibility was taken in the form of national law, but it is largely a political issue and tool that lies outside the civil law process.
view more
–
– I am quite confident that the judge in this case will make a legal decision that is not colored by political point of view.
The January 6 committee, consisting of members of the House of Representatives, is currently reviewing documents and questioning witnesses.
The hearings have so far mostly taken place behind closed doors, but Løkke believes it is not unlikely that they will eventually be able to open for TV transmissions.
– May end up with the report being put in a drawer
The committee has a bad time, Løkke points out. Right now, the Democrats have a majority in the House of Representatives, but that could turn around in this autumn’s midterm elections.
Text messages reveal special circumstances
– If they do not manage to finish before the election, the entire report may end up in a drawer. The Republicans have tried to oppose this, and will continue to do so, because they believe it is a distinct political process.
At the same time, he acknowledges that the committee’s future conclusions are unlikely to affect the electorate in one direction or another.
– Today, the United States is so politicized that it almost does not matter what the committee comes to. They can have as much evidence as they want, but people will still interpret it into their own agenda. It is a pity.
–
