Appeals Court Allows Lawsuits Against Trump Over Capitol Riot to Proceed

A federal appeals court has ruled that lawsuits against Donald Trump over the US Capitol riot can move forward, rejecting his bid to dismiss the cases.

A federal appeals court ruled on Friday that lawsuits against Donald Trump over the U.S. Capitol riot can move forward, rejecting the former president's bid to dismiss the cases accusing him of inciting the violent mob on January 6, 2021.

The Decision

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit court knocked down Trump's sweeping claims that presidential immunity shields him from liability in the lawsuits brought by Democratic lawmakers and police officers. However, the three-judge panel said the 2024 Republican presidential primary frontrunner can continue to fight, as the cases proceed, to try to prove that his actions were taken in his official capacity as president.

Trump's Defense

Trump has argued that he can't be sued over the riot that left dozens of police officers injured, claiming that his words during a rally before the storming of the Capitol addressed "matters of public concern" and fall within the scope of absolute presidential immunity.

The Special Counsel's Case

The decision comes as Trump's lawyers are arguing that he is also immune from prosecution in the separate criminal case brought by special counsel Jack Smith that accuses Trump of illegally plotting to overturn his election loss to President Joe Biden. Smith's team has signaled that it will make the case at trial that Trump is responsible for the violence at the Capitol and point to Trump's continued embrace of the January 6 rioters on the campaign trail to argue that he intended for the chaos that day.

Challenges for Trump

Friday's ruling underscores the challenges facing Trump as he tries to persuade courts, and potentially juries, that the actions he took in the run-up to the riot were part of his official duties as president. The judge presiding over his Capitol riot criminal trial is expected to also reject that claim.

Presidential Immunity

While courts have afforded presidents broad immunity for their official acts, the judges made clear that that protection does not cover just any act or speech undertaken by a president. A president running for a second term, for example, is not carrying out the official duties of the presidency when he is speaking at a rally funded by his reelection campaign or attends a private fundraiser, the appeals court said.

Next Steps

Trump could ask the full appeals court to take up the matter or go to the U.S. Supreme Court. A lawyer for Trump, Jesse Binnall, did not immediately return a phone message seeking comment on the ruling. A Trump campaign spokesperson called the decision "limited, narrow, and procedural."

The Lawsuits

The lawsuits seek civil damages for harms they say they endured when rioters descended on the Capitol as Congress met to certify Biden's election victory, smashing windows, engaging in hand-to-hand combat with police officers, and sending lawmakers running into hiding. One of the lawsuits, filed by Rep. Eric Swalwell, a Democrat from California, alleges that Trump directly incited the violence at the Capitol and then watched approvingly as the building was overrun.

The Officers' Perspective

Two other lawsuits were also filed, one by other House Democrats and another by officers James Blassingame and Sidney Hemby, who were both injured in the riot. Blassingame said on Friday that he "couldn't be more committed to pursuing accountability in the case.

The Justice Department's civil division urged the court earlier this year to let the cases proceed, arguing that a president wouldn't be protected by absolute immunity if his words were found to have been an "incitement of imminent private violence."

The current appeal was decided by a unanimous three-court panel that included Judge Gregory Katsas, a Trump appointee to the bench who authored his own concurring opinion.