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.



Why Trump Cannot Hide Behind Presidential Immunity for Inciting an Insurrection, Lawfare, Dayna Zolle, August 2, 2021:


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


More from Rule of Law

Rule of Law
October 3, 2023

RELEASE: CFPB v. CFSA Oral Argument: Opponents of CFPB Fail to Convince Justices Across the Ideological Spectrum

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Consumer Financial...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Rule of Law
October 2, 2023

Existential Threat to CFPB Spotlights Massive Stakes of New Supreme Court Term

Common Dreams
“How the court rules, and the relief it orders, will have enormous implications for the...
By: Brianne J. Gorod, Brian R. Frazelle, Alex Rowell, By Jake Johnson
Rule of Law
October 2, 2023

What Fresh Hell Will This Supreme Court Term Bring?

Crooked - Strict Scrutiny
It’s the start of a new Supreme Court term… and the start of Strict Scrutiny’s...
Rule of Law
U.S. Supreme Court

United States Department of Agriculture Rural Development Rural Housing Service v. Kirtz

In Kirtz, the Supreme Court is considering whether private individuals can sue the federal government for violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Rule of Law
October 2, 2023

CFPB’s Future at Stake as Supreme Court Hears Funding Arguments

Bloomberg Law
Oral arguments in a battle over the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s funding scheme are likely...
By: Brianne J. Gorod, By Evan Weinberger
Rule of Law
October 1, 2023

Supreme Court prepares for new term by looking back, with likely impact on 2024 elections

Fox News
Supreme Court to examine gun rights, election redistricting, free speech and other hot-button topics
By: Brianne J. Gorod, By Shannon Bream, Bill Mears