Posted on 10/14/2023 6:42:38 PM PDT by bitt
Trump is arguing that presidents, even after their term is over, are absolutely immune from criminal prosecutions arising out of their acts in office.
Thursday afternoon in a Washington, D.C., federal court, former President Donald Trump filed a motion to dismiss the case pending against him there for his alleged actions in the aftermath of the 2020 election. The motion cites presidential immunity as a ground to dismiss the case in its entirety.
The motion persuasively argues that the D.C. case should be dismissed, and if past practice is any guide all proceedings could and should be stayed while this issue is litigated fully, all the way up to the Supreme Court if necessary. Notably, this same reasoning should apply to the ongoing Georgia prosecution as well. A number of legal commentators have anticipated this move and have stated from the outset that presidential immunity should be an absolute bar to the prosecution of Trump for his alleged acts in office that underlie the federal prosecution in D.C.
1. What Is Presidential Immunity? In essence, President Trump is arguing that presidents, even after their terms in office are over, are absolutely immune from criminal prosecutions arising out of their acts in office that fall within the “outer perimeter” of their official responsibilities as president, unless they have first been both impeached and convicted by the House of Representatives and Senate.
He is arguing that all of the acts he is alleged to have committed fall within this absolute immunity. This view, as the motion filed Thursday makes clear, is deeply rooted in bedrock legal principles, in caselaw, in the Constitution, and in actual practice dating back centuries.
In Nixon v. Fitzgerald, the Supreme Court ruled that a president has absolute immunity from civil liability for acts within the outer perimeter
(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...
P
If this weren't true every President could look forward to being dragooned by the opposition as soon as he's out.
It would be used as a blackmail threat to every sitting President: do something we don't like and we'll charge you after the fact with any thin thread we can string together.
>> It would be used as a blackmail threat to every sitting President: do something we don’t like and we’ll charge you after the fact with any thin thread we can string together.
Excellent point.
This view, as the motion filed Thursday makes clear, is deeply rooted in bedrock legal principles, in caselaw, in the Constitution, and in actual practice dating back centuries.
Not that the left will let that get in their way...
Unbelievable this is going on while we have this criminal election stealing, Taliban arming, Iran funding, Hamas supporting, bribe taking, border destroying brain dead punk sitting in the Oval office who doesn’t get 1/1000th of the heat Trump gets
Great article! Thanks for posting it.
“Will Scharf is a former federal prosecutor, who also worked on the confirmations of Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. He is currently a Republican candidate for Missouri Attorney General.”
The author is a heavyweight on this subject.
While we applaud this for Trump, he may be opening the door to some demonic dem to use his precident. Trump is going to give us years of unintended consequence.
“While we applaud this for Trump, he may be opening the door to some demonic dem to use his precident.”
One, can you not read, it already is a precedent.
Second, can you not understand, we already have a demonic democrat in the White House.
“Trump is arguing that presidents, even after their term is over, are absolutely immune from criminal prosecutions arising out of their acts in office.”
They’re not “absolutely immune”. If they are impeached and removed from office for some violation, then they can be prosecuted. If not, they should be immune.
Not only should it be dismissed, Smith and every lawyer that worked with him should be disbarred.
BTTT
That’s exactly right.
>> he may be opening the door to some demonic dem to use his precident.
I suppose that’s true, but the law is the law and (don’t we always say) everyone is equal under the law.
And... wouldn’t it be sad if President Trump DIDN’T avail himself of this defense under the law and suffered the consequence of a legal loss... and then some demonic dem (repetitious, I know) used this defense successfully anyhow?
>> Smith and every lawyer that worked with him should be disbarred
My preference would be “hung from lampposts” but disbarring would be okay too.
He needs to be awarded legal expenses plus damages.
It sounds like INSURRECTION by these libs.
Insurrection? Did they actually take the guided tour of the capitol? Fools. / sarcasm
Not to mention the feckless rinos can’t even impeach the most obviously corrupt president of all time. There is absolutely zero chance of rinos ever bringing suit against former dim presidents.
Would be interesting if this works with Merrick and Biden in charge. Would they let Trump live free if they knew if Biden could skate claiming immunity for all his crimes?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.