Former U.S. President Donald Trump, the Republican presidential front-runner, talks reporters at the International Brotherhood of Teamsters headquarters on January 31, 2024 in Washington, D.C.
'Citizen Trump': Appeals Court Says No Immunity in Jan. 6 Case
One legal analyst said, "A president being immune to prosecution would fly in the face of our nation's core values."
A three-judge panel from the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday unanimously ruled against former U.S. President Donald Trump's claims of immunity in a criminal case stemming from his efforts to overturn his 2020 loss.
"For the purpose of this criminal case, former President Trump has become citizen Trump, with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant. But any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as president no longer protects him against this prosecution," states the 57-page opinion.
The panel included one judge appointed by former GOP President George H.W. Bush and two appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden, who is seeking reelection this year. Trump is the Republican front-runner despite four ongoing criminal cases and arguments he is constitutionally disqualified from holding office again after engaging in insurrection on January 6, 2021.
Welcoming the development, the watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington declared: "Donald Trump is not above prosecution. The law and the Constitution apply to him just like they apply to every other American. This is a major victory for our democracy and the rule of law."
Lisa Gilbert, executive vice president of Public Citizen, said: "Yet another court has recognized that Trump's immunity arguments are absurd and held that he can be prosecuted for actions, undertaken while president, that enabled the January 6 insurrection. This decision puts yet another period at the end of the statement, 'No one is above the law.'"
People for the American Way President Svante Myrick also praised the decision, saying that "the judges on the D.C. Circuit court got it right: No president can swear to uphold the laws of the land and then enjoy immunity if he breaks them. The idea is absurd on its face and Donald Trump's claim of immunity is a desperate attempt to avoid accountability for his actions."
"But make no mistake; this ruling is likely to make Trump even more desperate, as he tries to escape criminal prosecution by any means—including winning reelection to the presidency so he can make this prosecution go away," he warned. "Now is the time to double down on our work to make sure Trump is held accountable for his crimes, and that he never occupies the Oval Office again."
The ruling aligns with the panel's skepticism during arguments last month. When one judge had challenged the limits of immunity by asking Trump's attorney whether a president could "order SEAL Team 6 to assassinate a political rival," the lawyer responded that "he would have to be and would speedily be impeached and convicted before the criminal prosecution."
The panel's decision comes after Judge Tanya Chutkan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia—who rejected Trump's immunity claim in December—last week postponed his election interference trial, which had been scheduled for March. Trump is expected to appeal Tuesday's decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, whose right-wing supermajority includes three justices he appointed.
The mandate from the appellate court opinion denying Trump immunity "issues in six days on February 12," noted Los Angeles Times senior legal affairs columnist Harry Litman. "That's very quick and puts him in a box having to find a stay before then," from the full D.C. Circuit or the Supreme Court, or Chutkan can proceed with the trial.
The high court in December rejected a request from Special Counsel Jack Smith—who is overseeing Trump's two federal cases rather than the U.S. Justice Department because of the November election—that the justices skip over the appeals court to swiftly settle the immunity debate.
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just three days to go in our Spring Campaign, we're falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
A three-judge panel from the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday unanimously ruled against former U.S. President Donald Trump's claims of immunity in a criminal case stemming from his efforts to overturn his 2020 loss.
"For the purpose of this criminal case, former President Trump has become citizen Trump, with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant. But any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as president no longer protects him against this prosecution," states the 57-page opinion.
The panel included one judge appointed by former GOP President George H.W. Bush and two appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden, who is seeking reelection this year. Trump is the Republican front-runner despite four ongoing criminal cases and arguments he is constitutionally disqualified from holding office again after engaging in insurrection on January 6, 2021.
Welcoming the development, the watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington declared: "Donald Trump is not above prosecution. The law and the Constitution apply to him just like they apply to every other American. This is a major victory for our democracy and the rule of law."
Lisa Gilbert, executive vice president of Public Citizen, said: "Yet another court has recognized that Trump's immunity arguments are absurd and held that he can be prosecuted for actions, undertaken while president, that enabled the January 6 insurrection. This decision puts yet another period at the end of the statement, 'No one is above the law.'"
People for the American Way President Svante Myrick also praised the decision, saying that "the judges on the D.C. Circuit court got it right: No president can swear to uphold the laws of the land and then enjoy immunity if he breaks them. The idea is absurd on its face and Donald Trump's claim of immunity is a desperate attempt to avoid accountability for his actions."
"But make no mistake; this ruling is likely to make Trump even more desperate, as he tries to escape criminal prosecution by any means—including winning reelection to the presidency so he can make this prosecution go away," he warned. "Now is the time to double down on our work to make sure Trump is held accountable for his crimes, and that he never occupies the Oval Office again."
The ruling aligns with the panel's skepticism during arguments last month. When one judge had challenged the limits of immunity by asking Trump's attorney whether a president could "order SEAL Team 6 to assassinate a political rival," the lawyer responded that "he would have to be and would speedily be impeached and convicted before the criminal prosecution."
The panel's decision comes after Judge Tanya Chutkan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia—who rejected Trump's immunity claim in December—last week postponed his election interference trial, which had been scheduled for March. Trump is expected to appeal Tuesday's decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, whose right-wing supermajority includes three justices he appointed.
The mandate from the appellate court opinion denying Trump immunity "issues in six days on February 12," noted Los Angeles Times senior legal affairs columnist Harry Litman. "That's very quick and puts him in a box having to find a stay before then," from the full D.C. Circuit or the Supreme Court, or Chutkan can proceed with the trial.
The high court in December rejected a request from Special Counsel Jack Smith—who is overseeing Trump's two federal cases rather than the U.S. Justice Department because of the November election—that the justices skip over the appeals court to swiftly settle the immunity debate.
- Trump Claims Presidents 'Have Absolute Immunity,' But Judges Seem Skeptical ›
- Federal Judge Postpones March Trump Trial Over Immunity Fight ›
- Win for Trump as US Supreme Court Punts on Immunity Question ›
- Trump Channels Nixon With 'Presidential Immunity' Defense in January 6 Case ›
- Trump Appeals Presidential Immunity Claim to US Supreme Court ›
A three-judge panel from the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday unanimously ruled against former U.S. President Donald Trump's claims of immunity in a criminal case stemming from his efforts to overturn his 2020 loss.
"For the purpose of this criminal case, former President Trump has become citizen Trump, with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant. But any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as president no longer protects him against this prosecution," states the 57-page opinion.
The panel included one judge appointed by former GOP President George H.W. Bush and two appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden, who is seeking reelection this year. Trump is the Republican front-runner despite four ongoing criminal cases and arguments he is constitutionally disqualified from holding office again after engaging in insurrection on January 6, 2021.
Welcoming the development, the watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington declared: "Donald Trump is not above prosecution. The law and the Constitution apply to him just like they apply to every other American. This is a major victory for our democracy and the rule of law."
Lisa Gilbert, executive vice president of Public Citizen, said: "Yet another court has recognized that Trump's immunity arguments are absurd and held that he can be prosecuted for actions, undertaken while president, that enabled the January 6 insurrection. This decision puts yet another period at the end of the statement, 'No one is above the law.'"
People for the American Way President Svante Myrick also praised the decision, saying that "the judges on the D.C. Circuit court got it right: No president can swear to uphold the laws of the land and then enjoy immunity if he breaks them. The idea is absurd on its face and Donald Trump's claim of immunity is a desperate attempt to avoid accountability for his actions."
"But make no mistake; this ruling is likely to make Trump even more desperate, as he tries to escape criminal prosecution by any means—including winning reelection to the presidency so he can make this prosecution go away," he warned. "Now is the time to double down on our work to make sure Trump is held accountable for his crimes, and that he never occupies the Oval Office again."
The ruling aligns with the panel's skepticism during arguments last month. When one judge had challenged the limits of immunity by asking Trump's attorney whether a president could "order SEAL Team 6 to assassinate a political rival," the lawyer responded that "he would have to be and would speedily be impeached and convicted before the criminal prosecution."
The panel's decision comes after Judge Tanya Chutkan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia—who rejected Trump's immunity claim in December—last week postponed his election interference trial, which had been scheduled for March. Trump is expected to appeal Tuesday's decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, whose right-wing supermajority includes three justices he appointed.
The mandate from the appellate court opinion denying Trump immunity "issues in six days on February 12," noted Los Angeles Times senior legal affairs columnist Harry Litman. "That's very quick and puts him in a box having to find a stay before then," from the full D.C. Circuit or the Supreme Court, or Chutkan can proceed with the trial.
The high court in December rejected a request from Special Counsel Jack Smith—who is overseeing Trump's two federal cases rather than the U.S. Justice Department because of the November election—that the justices skip over the appeals court to swiftly settle the immunity debate.
- Trump Claims Presidents 'Have Absolute Immunity,' But Judges Seem Skeptical ›
- Federal Judge Postpones March Trump Trial Over Immunity Fight ›
- Win for Trump as US Supreme Court Punts on Immunity Question ›
- Trump Channels Nixon With 'Presidential Immunity' Defense in January 6 Case ›
- Trump Appeals Presidential Immunity Claim to US Supreme Court ›