Rule of Law

RELEASE: Judge Should Be Skeptical of Trump Attorneys’ Argument for Total Immunity for January 6 Acts

WASHINGTONFollowing oral argument over motions to dismiss lawsuits brought by Capitol Police officers and Members of Congress for damages relating to injuries former President Trump allegedly caused by his actions on and leading up to January 6, 2021, Constitutional Accountability Center Vice President Praveen Fernandes issued the following statement:

While the events of January 6, 2021, might have been extraordinary, the constitutional accountability principle at issue in these cases is anything but. No one is above the law.

In today’s lengthy hearing, Judge Mehta asked insightful and pointed questions of all parties. The former president’s attorneys tried to make the case that Trump’s remarks and acts on and leading up to January 6 were part of Trump’s official duties as president. But as the amicus briefs we filed in these cases on behalf of legal scholars explained, Trump’s conduct in allegedly inciting a riot at the Capitol to forcibly disrupt a session of Congress fell far outside the outer perimeter of his official responsibility.

In short, today’s hearing should have only reinforced the points that we made in those briefsabsolute presidential immunity does not shield a former president, sued in his personal capacity, from damages liability for unofficial conduct.

We hope for a prompt ruling from Judge Mehta.

#

Resources:

Why Trump Cannot Hide Behind Presidential Immunity for Inciting an Insurrection, Lawfare, Dayna Zolle, August 2, 2021: https://www.lawfareblog.com/why-trump-cannot-hide-behind-presidential-immunity-inciting-insurrection

##

Constitutional Accountability Center is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history. Visit CAC’s website at www.theusconstitution.org.

###

More from Rule of Law

Rule of Law
February 25, 2026

Supreme Court not fully sold on foreclosure fairness bid

Courthouse News Service
A showdown over tax foreclosures had the justices considering the striking set of facts that...
Rule of Law
February 25, 2026

CAC Release: Supreme Court Oral Argument Focuses on Takings Clause, While Largely Ignoring the Problematic Excessive-Fines-Clause Analysis Applied by the Court Below

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Pung v....
By: Miriam Becker-Cohen
Rule of Law
February 24, 2026

50+ Organizations Condemn Federal Authorities for Blocking Minnesota’s Independent Investigation into CBP Killing of Alex Pretti

WASHINGTON, DC — Today marks one month since the killing of Alex Pretti on January...
Rule of Law
February 20, 2026

CAC Release: Supreme Court Rejects President Trump’s Claim of Unilateral Tariff Authority

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Learning Resources v. Trump and Trump...
By: Simon Chin
Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

Climate United Fund v. Citibank

In Climate United Fund v. Citibank, the en banc United States of Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is considering whether the Trump administration can unilaterally abolish a mandatory grant program created by Congress.
Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Oregon v. Landis

In Oregon v. Landis, the Ninth Circuit is considering when states may prosecute federal officers for state crimes.