President Donald Trump is not immune from a sweeping federal lawsuit seeking to hold the president accountable for violence at the Capitol on January 6, 2021 — and he now has to answer why he shouldn’t be forced to testify.
A long-running civil suit from Democratic members of Congress and law enforcement officers who faced a mob of Trump’s supporters accuses the president of leading a “coordinated campaign” to incite mob violence that threatened to overturn his loss in the 2020 election.
In a victory for the plaintiffs last month, District Judge Amit Mehta in Washington, D.C., ruled that Trump is not immune from litigation against a bulk of his actions leading up to January 6, including his speech to his supporters in the moments before the mob’s assault, most of his contacts with state and local officials, and virtually all of his Twitter posts.
On Monday night, the judge said the president now must explain why lawyers can’t collect evidence against him — which could include his testimony.
The Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity in 2024 shielded Trump from criminal prosecution for “official” acts in office. Federal indictments against the president for his “unofficial” acts came to an end after his election last year, and Trump has pardoned virtually every rioter who joined the January 6 mob. But Judge Mehta is not letting the president off the hook just yet.
Trump’s lawyers have already appealed Mehta’s immunity decision. That appeal and potential evidence collection will likely add months or years to litigation that has been playing out since February 2021, weeks after Trump’s supporters stormed the Capitol.
The president has to answer the judge’s latest decision by April 29. Plaintiffs can respond by May 8, and Trump can reply to their response by May 15.
The Independent has requested comment from Trump’s legal team and the White House.
In 2022, Judge Mehta rejected Trump’s attempt to dismiss the case, finding that the plaintiffs had plausibly alleged that Trump’s acts leading up to the January 6 attack had nothing to do with his job as president.
Mehta also determined that Trump’s remarks on the Ellipse — which included a call to “fight like hell” — were not protected under the First Amendment.
Trump’s Department of Justice later joined the litigation in an attempt to shield the president from liability.
In a ruling on March 31, Mehta argued that the president “offered no meaningful evidence” and failed to prove that his rally speech and his pressure campaign against state and local officials to reject election results were part of his official duties as president.
Mehta stressed that his decision is “not a final pronouncement on immunity for any particular act” but a rejection of the president’s attempt to summarily dismiss the case on those grounds.
“President Trump remains free to reassert official-acts immunity as a defense at trial,” Mehta wrote. “But the burden will remain his and will be subject to a higher standard of proof.”
Former Rep. Barbara Lee, a named plaintiff in the lawsuit who is now the mayor of Oakland, California, said the decision is a “landmark” reminder “that no one is above the law.”
“This unprecedented, violent attack on our country, incited by Donald Trump, threatened the bedrock of our democracy — the peaceful transfer of power,” she said last month.
While Trump wrestles with yet another civil suit against him, the president has overseen a government-effort to downplay the riots and whitewash violence that took over the Capitol grounds while lawmakers gathered to certify the results of the 2020 election.
Last week, U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro filed motions to erase the convictions against 12 members of the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys, including defendants who were convicted of treason-related charges.
More than 1,500 people were criminally charged in connection with the riots, fueled by Trump’s false narrative that the 2020 presidential election was rigged and stolen from him. Hundreds of defendants pleaded guilty, and more than 200 others were found guilty at trial.
Trump pardoned nearly every person charged in connection with the attack on his first day in office, and Pirro and federal prosecutors are now asking the U.S. Court of Appeals in D.C. to wipe out those remaining convictions so they can be formally dismissed.
Dozens of people who were convicted or accused of a range of crimes in connection with the riots are also suing the federal government, alleging law enforcement officers used excessive force while fighting back against them.
The Justice Department has already settled with the family of Ashli Babbitt, who was fatally shot by a Capitol police officer after trying to break into the House of Representatives. Trump has said he would “look at” the government’s decision to drop a potential case against the officer who shot her.
A newly launched White House website also blames law enforcement officers for “deliberately escalating tensions” during the attack and formally declares that a “stolen election was certified.”
🚨 BREAKING: Watch the full clip here ➤
