Late Saturday, Trump filed another brief contending that he is immune from prosecution under the president’s protections, this time urging a federal appeals court to dismiss the federal election subversion criminal case in Washington, DC.
In the election subversion case brought by special counsel Jack Smith, Trump is requesting that the DC Circuit Court of Appeals reverse a lower court’s decision that denied his immunity claims. The Supreme Court denied Smith’s plea for an expedited review on Friday, and the appeals panel is now considering Trump’s request.
The former president’s attorneys have long argued that Trump has immunity because he was acting in his official capacity as president to “ensure election integrity” when he allegedly tainted the 2020 election results, and that the indictment against him is unconstitutional because presidents cannot be held criminally responsible for “official acts” unless they are impeached and found guilty by the Senate. The filing restates these arguments.
On Saturday, Trump’s legal team argued that the Constitution had a strong structural check to prohibit political groups from using the criminal prosecution as a weapon to weaken the president and harm his political opponents.
“Impeachment and conviction of the president are necessary prerequisites for any prosecutor to seek judicial review of the president’s actions,” they stated. “President Trump has absolute immunity because that did not happen here.”
He has been trying to put off his trial in the matter, which is scheduled for March 4, and his struggle over the immunity claim is a prime example of that.
His appeal has been moved up in the queue, and on January 9, the appeals court will hear oral arguments. His criminal case is being presided over by District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who has put all procedural deadlines on hold while the appeal is being heard.
In a Friday ruling, the Supreme Court denied Smith’s motion to skip the DC Circuit’s review and hear the matter straightaway. If the appeals court rules in a certain way, either party can take their case all the way to the Supreme Court to challenge the decision.
The Trump camp requested earlier this month that the appeals court review Chutkan’s immunity decision. The divine right of kings to dodge the criminal accountability that controls his fellow citizens was not bestowed upon Trump by his four-year duty as Commander in Chief, according to Chutkan’s decision, which rejected Trump’s immunity claims.
Although Trump’s lawyers argued that the criminal indictment should be dismissed on the grounds that their client was acting within his official capacity as president to “ensure election integrity” when he allegedly undermined the 2020 election results, Chutkan had previously rejected these claims, holding that the president is protected by presidential immunity. On Saturday, the defence reaffirmed those points.
At a Saturday press conference, Trump’s legal team claimed that Chutkan “missed what the Founders recognised: That punishment of the President is irreducibly political and so belongs primarily to the branch most politically accountable—Congress and, ultimately, the Senate.”
The charge against Trump, they added, “threatens to launch cycles of recrimination and politically motivated prosecution that will plague our Nation for many decades to come.” A
