Trump can’t use immunity to avoid Capitol Police lawsuits

A federal appeals court on Friday allowed a lawsuit filed by a group of US Capitol Police officers against former President Donald Trump to move forward, ruling that Trump has no right to absolute immunity from civil lawsuits.

The lawsuit focuses on Trump's alleged conduct surrounding the Jan. 6 assault. 2021 to the United States Capitol.

A three-judge panel of the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals based its decision on an earlier ruling in a separate case, which was brought by two Capitol Police officers and a group of House Democrats of Representatives and which was issued earlier this month, according to CBS News.

In its December 1 opinion, the Circuit of DC rejected Trump's claim that he is protected from civil liability because his alleged actions in connection with the January 6 attack fell within the official duties of the presidency.

In its opinion unsigned Friday, the three judges said the case before them is “indistinguishable” of the other civil dispute filed and said Trump's argument that he has immunity “fails”.

“Whether [President Trump's] actions involved speech on matters of public interest have no inherent connection to the essential distinction between acts ‘official and unofficial’,” Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan and Judges Bradley Garcia and Judith Rogers wrote in their opinion, citing the D.C. Circuit's earlier ruling.

The civil case against Trump launched by Capitol Police

The case was brought in August 2021 by seven Capitol Police officers who defended the Capitol complex on January 6 and were assaulted and harassed during the riot, which they said , was the result of “illegal actions” of Trump and his allies.

In addition to suing Trump, officers named more than a dozen other people as defendants.

Among them are members of the far-right groups Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, as well as Roger Stone, a former Trump ally.

Capitol Police officers sought civil damages for the physical and emotional injuries they said they suffered as a result of the Jan. 6 attack.

Trump asked the federal District Court in Washington to dismissed the case, arguing that he is absolutely immune from being sued for those alleged acts.

But in January 2023, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta rejected their argument and allowed the case to continue.

Mehta applied the same reasoning used in the case brought by Democratic lawmakers and two police officers that the appeals court used in its ruling this Friday.

Judge Mehta ruled in February 2022 that Trump is not entitled to broad immunity from civil lawsuits seeking to hold him responsible for the January 6 riots.

“The president's actions here do not relate to his duties to faithfully carry out the laws, conduct foreign affairs, command the armed forces or administer the Executive Branch. They refer entirely to  referencing Trump's speech outside the White House before they entered the Capitol building

Instead, the judge said, Trump's words were an implicit call for imminent violence or anarchy” which is not protected by presidential immunity or the First Amendment.

The D.C. Circuit agreed with the lower court's ruling and rejected Trump's argument that he was participating in an official presidential function when he spoke in front of to the White House on January 6.

“When a president in his first term chooses to seek a second term, his campaign to win reelection is not an official presidential act,” wrote Srinivasan, who was assigned both cases, for the three-judge panel, in the ruling released Friday. “The Office of the President as an institution is agnostic about who will fill it next. And campaigning to win that office is not an official act of office.

Trump can request review of the adverse rulings in both civil cases before the full DC Circuit or before the Supreme Court of the United States.